lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [UPDATE PATCH] ieee1394/sbp2: use ssleep() instead of schedule_timeout()
    From
    Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
    > Description: Use ssleep() instead of schedule_timeout() to guarantee
    > the task
    > delays as expected. The existing code should not really need to run in
    > TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, as there is no check for signals (or even an
    > early return
    > value whatsoever). ssleep() takes care of these issues.

    > --- 2.6.10-v/drivers/ieee1394/sbp2.c 2004-12-24 13:34:00.000000000
    > -0800
    > +++ 2.6.10/drivers/ieee1394/sbp2.c 2005-01-05 14:23:05.000000000 -0800
    > @@ -902,8 +902,7 @@ alloc_fail:
    > * connected to the sbp2 device being removed. That host would
    > * have a certain amount of time to relogin before the sbp2 device
    > * allows someone else to login instead. One second makes sense. */
    > - set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
    > - schedule_timeout(HZ);
    > + ssleep(1);

    Maybe the current code is _deliberately_ accepting interruption by
    signals but trying to complete sbp2_probe() anyway. However it seems
    more plausible to me to abort the device probe, for example like this:
    if (msleep_interruptible(1000)) {
    sbp2_remove_device(scsi_id);
    return -EINTR;
    }
    Anyway, signal handling does not appear to be critical there.
    --
    Stefan Richter
    -=====-=-=-= ---= -=--=
    http://arcgraph.de/sr/

    -
    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 14:09    [W:0.020 / U:29.776 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site