From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
To: Al Borchers <alborchers@steinerpoint.com>
Cc: david-b@pacbell.net, greg@kroah.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] add wait_event_*_lock() functions
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 09:31:18 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050211173118.GA2372@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1108105628.420c599cf3558@my.visi.com>
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 01:07:08AM -0600, Al Borchers wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday 10 February 2005 9:39 am, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> >> It came up on IRC that the wait_cond*() functions from
> >> usb/serial/gadget.c could be useful in other parts of the kernel. Does
> >> the following patch make sense towards this?
>
> Sure, if people want to use these.
>
> I did not push them because they seemed a bit "heavy weight",
> but the construct is useful and general.
I think that is very much the case. As I was setting up patches for the
Kernel-Janitors to clean up the wait-queue usage in the kernel, I found
I was unable to use wait_event*(), as locks needed to be
released/grabbed around the sleep. wait_event_*_lock() fixes this
problem, clearly :)
> The docs should explain that the purpose is to wait atomically on
> a complex condition, and that the usage pattern is to hold the
> lock when using the wait_event_* functions or when changing any
> variable that might affect the condition and waking up the waiting
> processes.
I will submit a new patch which documents the general structure of the
wait_event_*() class of functions, including what you have written.
Thanks,
Nish
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-11 17:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-11 7:07 [RFC PATCH] add wait_event_*_lock() functions Al Borchers
2005-02-11 17:31 ` Nishanth Aravamudan [this message]
2005-02-11 19:55 ` [RFC UPDATE PATCH] add wait_event_*_lock() functions and comments Nishanth Aravamudan
2005-02-12 11:38 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-12 13:28 ` Sergey Vlasov
2005-02-13 2:41 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-13 5:00 ` Nish Aravamudan
2005-02-15 1:04 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2005-02-15 17:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-15 18:19 ` Nish Aravamudan
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-02-10 17:39 [RFC PATCH] add wait_event_*_lock() functions Nishanth Aravamudan
2005-02-10 18:21 ` David Brownell
2005-02-10 18:37 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050211173118.GA2372@us.ibm.com \
--to=nacc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=alborchers@steinerpoint.com \
--cc=david-b@pacbell.net \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.