[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87sff7qbn7.ffs@tglx>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 14:52:12 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>,
John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Michael <michael@...isi.de>, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] time: alarmtimer: Use TASK_FREEZABLE to
cleanup freezer handling
On Wed, Feb 15 2023 at 09:22, Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 7:45 AM John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com> wrote:
>> /**
>> * clock2alarm - helper that converts from clockid to alarmtypes
>> * @clockid: clockid.
>> @@ -750,7 +703,7 @@ static int alarmtimer_do_nsleep(struct alarm *alarm, ktime_t absexp,
>> struct restart_block *restart;
>> alarm->data = (void *)current;
>> do {
>> - set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>> + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_FREEZABLE);
>
> For kernel 5.10.x and lts is possible to use freezable_schedule and
> let this set_current_state as was before.
> I have seen patch that introduce the new state but I suppose that in
> order to be compatible to stable this should be the
> change. Am I right?
We always work against upstream first and there freezable_schedule() is
gone. Backports have to be sorted seperately.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists