[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <172644436782.17050.10401810341028694092@noble.neil.brown.name>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 09:52:47 +1000
From: "NeilBrown" <neilb@...e.de>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>, "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Jens Axboe" <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7 v2 RFC] Make wake_up_{bit,var} less fragile
Hi Ingo and Peter,
have you had a chance to look at these yet? Should I resend? Maybe
after -rc is out?
Thanks,
NeilBrown
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024, NeilBrown wrote:
> This is a second attempt to make wake_up_{bit,var} less fragile.
> This version doesn't change those functions much, but instead
> improves the documentation and provides some helpers which
> both serve as patterns to follow and alternates so that use of the
> fragile functions can be limited or eliminated.
>
> The only change to either function is that wake_up_bit() is changed to
> take an unsigned long * rather than a void *. This necessitates the
> first patch which changes the one place where something other then
> unsigned long * is passed to wake_up bit - it is in block/.
>
> The final patch modifies the same bit of code as a demonstration of one
> of the new APIs that has been added.
>
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
>
>
> [PATCH 1/7] block: change wait on bd_claiming to use a var_waitqueue,
> [PATCH 2/7] sched: change wake_up_bit() and related function to
> [PATCH 3/7] sched: Improve documentation for wake_up_bit/wait_on_bit
> [PATCH 4/7] sched: Document wait_var_event() family of functions and
> [PATCH 5/7] sched: Add test_and_clear_wake_up_bit() and
> [PATCH 6/7] sched: Add wait/wake interface for variable updated under
> [PATCH 7/7] Block: switch bd_prepare_to_claim to use
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists