linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] SCHED: remove proliferation of wait_on

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 22 May 2014 19:50:56 +1000
From:	NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...hat.com,
	Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
	Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SCHED: remove proliferation of wait_on_bit action
 functions.

On Thu, 22 May 2014 11:05:02 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:

> 
> * NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de> wrote:
> 
> > [[ get_maintainer.pl suggested 61 email address for this patch.
> >    I've trimmed that list somewhat.  Hope I didn't miss anyone
> >    important...
> >    I'm hoping it will go in through the scheduler tree, but would
> >    particularly like an Acked-by for the fscache parts.  Other acks
> >    welcome.
> > ]]
> > 
> > The current "wait_on_bit" interface requires an 'action' function
> > to be provided which does the actual waiting.
> > There are over 20 such functions, many of them identical.
> > Most cases can be satisfied by one of just two functions, one
> > which uses io_schedule() and one which just uses schedule().
> > 
> > So:
> >  Rename wait_on_bit and        wait_on_bit_lock to
> >         wait_on_bit_action and wait_on_bit_lock_action
> >  to make it explicit that they need an action function.
> > 
> >  Introduce new wait_on_bit{,_lock} and wait_on_bit{,_lock}_io
> >  which are *not* given an action function but implicitly use
> >  a standard one.
> >  The decision to error-out if a signal is pending is now made
> >  based on the 'mode' argument rather than being encoded in the action
> >  function.
> 
> this patch fails to build on x86-32 allyesconfigs.

Could you share the build errors?

> 
> Could we keep the old names for a while, and remove them in the next 
> cycle or so?

I don't see how changing the names later rather than now will reduce the
chance of errors... maybe I'm missing something.

Thanks,
NeilBrown



> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	Ingo


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)