Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Tue, 1 Oct 2013 16:09:40 +0200 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/6] sched, wait: Collapse __wait_event macros -v4 |
| |
On 09/30, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 09/30, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 07:40:54PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > Once again, of course I do not blame this series, but > > > wait_event_timeout(wq, true, 0) still returns 0. > > > > So we have: > > > > [...snip...] > > > So wait_event_timeout(wq, true, 0) turns into: > > Not really, because of fast-path check, > > #define wait_event_timeout(wq, condition, timeout) \ > ({ \ > long __ret = timeout; \ > if (!(condition)) \ > __ret = __wait_event_timeout(wq, condition, timeout); \ > __ret; \ > }) > > we do not even call __wait_event_timeout() if "condition" is already > true at the start.
But somehow I didn't realize that ___wait_cond_timeout() can be used as is, so the simple patch below should work?
Oleg.
--- x/include/linux/wait.h +++ x/include/linux/wait.h @@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ do { \ #define wait_event_timeout(wq, condition, timeout) \ ({ \ long __ret = timeout; \ - if (!(condition)) \ + if (!___wait_cond_timeout(condition)) \ __ret = __wait_event_timeout(wq, condition, timeout); \ __ret; \ }) @@ -328,7 +328,7 @@ do { \ #define wait_event_interruptible_timeout(wq, condition, timeout) \ ({ \ long __ret = timeout; \ - if (!(condition)) \ + if (!___wait_cond_timeout(condition)) \ __ret = __wait_event_interruptible_timeout(wq, \ condition, timeout); \ __ret; \ @@ -770,7 +770,7 @@ do { \ timeout) \ ({ \ long __ret = timeout; \ - if (!(condition)) \ + if (!___wait_cond_timeout(condition)) \ __ret = __wait_event_interruptible_lock_irq_timeout( \ wq, condition, lock, timeout); \ __ret; \
| |