[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <524288D4.9090407@colorfullife.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 08:55:16 +0200
From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
To: Jia He <jiakernel@...il.com>
CC: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipc/sem.c: fix update sem_otime when calling sem_op in
semaphore initialization
Hi Jia,
On 09/25/2013 05:05 AM, Jia He wrote:
> Hi Manfred
> IIUC after reivewing your patch and src code, does it seem
> sem_otime lost the chance to be updated when calling
> semctl_main/semctl_setval?
> In old codes, even whendo_smart_update(sma, NULL, 0, 0, &tasks),
> the otime can be updated after several conditions checking.
The update is performed now performed inside perform_atomic_semop():
Old code:
perform_atomic_semop() does not update sem_otime. It just returns 0 for
successfull operations.
This "0 returned" is passed upwards ("semop_completed") into
do_smart_update()
do_smart_update() updates sem_otime.
New code:
perform_atomic_semop() updates sem_otime immediately (your change).
No need to keep track if a waiting operation was completed (my change).
I don't see a problem - perhaps I overlook something.
Which problem do you see?
--
Manfred
--
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