[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110906155332.GF18425@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 00:53:32 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: matthltc@...ibm.com, rjw@...k.pl, paul@...lmenage.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] freezer: kill unused set_freezable_with_signal()
Hello,
On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 05:25:39PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 09/06, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Yes, agreed. In this case I think it should be
> >
> > #define wait_event_freezable(wq, condition) \
> > ({ \
> > int __retval; \
> > for (;;) { \
> > __retval = wait_event_interruptible(wq, \
> > (condition) || freezing(current)); \
> > if (__retval || (condition)) \
> > break; \
> > try_to_freeze(); \
> > } \
> > __retval; \
> > })
> >
> > __retval/ERESTARTSYS is only needed for kthreads which play with allow_signal(),
> > probably nobody should do this.
>
> I meant, unless the caller plays with allow_signal(), it has all rights to do
>
> if (wait_event_freezable(...))
> BUG();
>
> This becomes correct with the code above.
Yeap, sure, w/ freezable_with_signal gone, the above should work fine.
Care to create a patch?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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