Messages in this thread | | | From | David Howells <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] slow_work_thread() should do the exclusive wait | Date | Mon, 13 Apr 2009 22:40:18 +0100 |
| |
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com> wrote:
> Should that really be TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE? I don't see anything obvious > in the enclosing for(;;) loop that checks for or handles signals...
If it were TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, it would sit there in the D-state when not doing anything. I must admit, I thought I was calling daemonize(), but that seems to have got lost somewhere.
David
| |