[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5416FA0C.6090703@citrix.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 15:39:08 +0100
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
To: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@...il.com>, <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
<boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>, <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
<mukesh.rathor@...cle.com>
CC: <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_client.c: Improve the failure
processing for __xenbus_switch_state()
On 14/09/14 11:52, Chen Gang wrote:
> When failure occurs, need return failure code instead of 0, or the upper
> caller will misunderstand.
>
> Also when retry for EAGAIN reason, better to schedule out for a while,
> so can let others have chance to continue their tasks (especially,
> their tasks are related EAGAIN under UP kernel).
Is this fixing a real world problem you have seen?
xenbus_scanf() and xenbus_printf() already sleep while waiting for the
response and delaying isn't going to reduce the likelihood of the
transaction being aborted on the retry.
David
--
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