[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150121150716.GD11596@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 16:07:16 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@...hat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch -rt 1/2] KVM: use simple waitqueue for vcpu->wq
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 01:16:13PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> I'm actually wondering if we should just nuke the _interruptible()
> version of swait. As it should only be all interruptible or all not
> interruptible, that the swait_wake() should just do the wake up
> regardless. In which case, swait_wake() is good enough. No need to have
> different versions where people may think do something special.
>
> Peter?
Yeah, I think the lastest thing I have sitting here on my disk only has
the swake_up() which does TASK_NORMAL, no choice there.
--
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