[lkml]   [2011]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH pm 1/2] usb_storage: don't use set_freezable_with_signal()
    On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 05:37:26PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
    > The current implementation of set_freezable_with_signal() is buggy and
    > tricky to get right. usb-storage is the only user and its use can be
    > avoided trivially.
    > All usb-storage wants is to be able to sleep with timeout and get
    > woken up if freezing() becomes true. This can be trivially
    > implemented by doing interruptible wait w/ freezing() included in the
    > wait condition. There's no reason to use set_freezable_with_signal().
    > Perform interruptible wait on freezing() instead of using
    > set_freezable_with_signal(), which is scheduled for removal.
    > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <>
    > Cc: Oleg Nesterov <>
    > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <>
    > Cc: Seth Forshee <>
    > Cc: Alan Stern <>
    > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <>
    > ---
    > These two patches are on top of "freezer: fix various bugs and
    > simplify implementation, take#2" patchset[1] and are also available in
    > the following git branch.
    > git:// pm-kill-freezable_with_signal
    > If usb-storage ppl are okay with it, I think routing this through pm
    > would be the easiest. Oh, and this definitely is for the next merge
    > window.

    I'm fine with it going that way:
    Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <>

     \ /
      Last update: 2011-11-15 02:07    [W:0.021 / U:17.992 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site