lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Suggest TASK_KILLABLE state to overcome most D state trouble
Date

bulb@ucw.cz said:
> Does a patch adding a TASK_KILLABLE state have a chance to get in (in
> 2.5)? Or can anybody thik of more elegant solution?

Often there's kernel state which needs to be kept consistent, and locks
which need to be released - just bailing out (as if you got an oops) isn't
sufficient.

What's wrong with the plan of just implementing the appropriate cleanup code
in each buggy or lazy piece of code which sleeps in state
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, and letting each be interruptible instead?

--
dwmw2


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03    [W:0.031 / U:40.156 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site