[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150610100729.6a674c15@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:07:29 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 09/18] kthread: Make it easier to correctly sleep in
iterant kthreads
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 11:07:24 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > Not to mention, tasks in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE state for too long will
> > trigger hung task detection.
>
> Right, and I had not considered that, but it turns out the hung_task
> detector checks p->state == TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, so TASK_IDLE is indeed
> safe from that.
Also, I would assume that TASK_IDLE only makes sense for kernel
threads, I wonder if we should add an assertion in schedule that
triggers if a task is scheduling with TASK_IDLE and is not a kernel
thread (has its own mm?)
-- Steve
--
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