[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 5 May 2017 13:35:02 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal: Export signal_wake_up_state() to modules
Hi Christoph,
On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 01:08:47PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Of course I can add a flag to indicate abortion, and just call complete_all(),
>> but IMHO that's a bit silly, given wait_for_completion_interruptible() already
>> provides this side channel information through -ERESTARTSYS.
>
> Even if this was the right channel (which I'm not sure about) it
> should be provided as an abstract API operating on the completion.
Hence my other question in the patch comments:
| Is exporting signal_wake_up_state() an acceptable solution?
| Alternatively, I can extract the code to abort an completion into a
| generic abort_completion() function, and export that.
Thanks!
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists