[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1336483427.23308.37.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 16:23:47 +0300
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc: linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, dwmw2@...radead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: Replace yield() with cond_resched()
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 12:59 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > The purpose was different. If we have I/O error, we hope it is a
> > transient failure. E.g., the HW is temporary unavailable because of an
> > internal issue. And with yield() we hoped to schedule away for longer
> > time than usual and let other processes which may affect that HW go
> > forward and do something.
>
> Okay, yield() is clearly the wrong choice here.
> cond_resched() is better.
I do not think it is better. Yes, for I/O I'd suggest
msleep_interruptible(200) instead.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists