[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1001211145480.13529@ask.diku.dk>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:47:41 +0100 (CET)
From: Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: Lots of bugs with current->state = TASK_*INTERRUPTIBLE
What about something like the following (drivers/macintosh/adb.c):
add_wait_queue(&state->wait_queue, &wait);
current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
for (;;) {
req = state->completed;
if (req != NULL)
state->completed = req->next;
else if (atomic_read(&state->n_pending) == 0)
ret = -EIO;
if (req != NULL || ret != 0)
break;
if (file->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK) {
ret = -EAGAIN;
break;
}
if (signal_pending(current)) {
ret = -ERESTARTSYS;
break;
}
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&state->lock, flags);
schedule();
spin_lock_irqsave(&state->lock, flags);
}
current->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue(&state->wait_queue, &wait);
There is a call to schedule eventually after the first current->state
assignment, but it is not right after.
thanks,
julia
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists