lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC] sched: introduce add_wait_queue_exclusive_head
On 03/18, Peng Tao wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > Unless you cannot use ___wait() and really need to open-code the
> > wait_event() stuff.
> >
> Lustre's private l_wait_event() stuff takes care to (un)mask
> LUSTRE_FATAL_SIGS

Hmm. This is off-topic but after the quick grep LUSTRE_FATAL_SIGS/etc
looks suspicious.

Firtsly, cfs_block_sigs/cfs_block_sigsinv/etc are not exactly right,
they need set_current_blocked(). And you can read "old" lockless.

And note that cfs_block_sigsinv(0) (which should block all signals)
can't actually protect from SIGKILL (or in fact from another fatal
signal) or SIGSTOP if the caller is multithreaded. Or ptrace, or
freezer.

> and always wait in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE state.

and it seems that __wstate passed to waitq_wait/waitq_timedwait is
simply ignored.

> It looks to me that we can at least wrap l_wait_event() on top of
> wait_event_interruptible/wait_event_timeout_interruptible.

l_wait_event looks really complicated ;) but perhaps you can rewrite
it on top of ___wait_event(), note that condition/cmd can do anything
you want.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-03-18 18:01    [W:0.223 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site