Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 1 Oct 2000 16:03:01 +0200 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: set_current_state() vs current->state |
| |
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 03:04:31AM -0400, Frank Davis wrote: > Hello all, > I've been going through the drivers/block code (almost done) and noticed the use of, eg.: > set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING); and also > current->state = TASK_RUNNING; > > Which one is most recent, and is there a suggestion on which one to use?
`__set_current_state(x)' is completly equivalent to `current->state = x'.
set_current_state(x) instead means:
current->state = x mb()
It puts a CPU memory barrier _after_ the assignment. This is necessary in most cases while using the wait-event interface to avoid SMP races.
In short you need set_current_state(x) when you do something that relies on the ordering like:
set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) if (event_happened_meanwhile) break; schedule();
You must make sure not to read `event_happened_meanwhile' before making visible the change of current->state to avoid missing one event and to hang in UNINTERRUPTIBLE mode in schedule.
You don't need the mb() version (so you can use __set_current_state(x)) when you do something that doesn't relies on the ordering like:
[..] remove_wait_queue(...); __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING); return;
In the l-k archives you should find further details of such SMP race conditions.
Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |