[lkml]   [1999]   [Dec]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: sleep_on, wake_up question
On Thu, 30 Dec 1999, Manfred Spraul wrote:

> "Richard B. Johnson" wrote:
> >
> > Mark,
> > I checked a later kernel and it can get stuck. However, you can
> > use sleep_on_timeout() to make sure you do get awakened.
> Ha? Do you really suggest adding a timeout to recover from the lock-up?
> You should _remove_ the lock-up instead of hiding it.
[SNIPPED reasonable code]

Well it's usually not a 'lockup' it's usually what hardware __does__,
i.e., fail to interrupt, etc. So my proposal will allow you to work-around
the hardware which usually has to be done anyway. It's either 'you missed
the interrupt` or 'the interrupt never happened`. Both cases allow you
to get control.

Dick Johnson

Penguin : Linux version 2.3.13 on an i686 machine (400.59 BogoMips).
Warning : The end of the world as we know it requires a new calendar.
Seconds : 119617 (until Y2K)

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [W:0.080 / U:0.336 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site