All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: Amol Lad <amol@verismonetworks.com>,
	kernel Janitors <kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org>,
	linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [KJ] most users of msleep_interruptible are broken
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:16:51 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061011141651.GD27388@parisc-linux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1160571491.3000.372.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>

On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 02:58:11PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > +++ linux-2.6.19-rc1/drivers/mmc/mmc.c	2006-10-11 17:57:02.000000000 +0530
> > @@ -454,7 +454,7 @@ static void mmc_deselect_cards(struct mm
> >  static inline void mmc_delay(unsigned int ms)
> >  {
> >  	if (ms < HZ / 1000) {
> > -		yield();
> > +		cond_resched();
> >  		mdelay(ms);
> 
> 
> this probably wants msleep(), especially with hrtimers comming up; there
> the sleeps are always exact...

They clearly don't care about exactness; they msleep_interruptible and
throw away the return value, so they don't know how long they slept
before they got a signal.

__must_check treatment for msleep_interruptible, anyone?  On the one hand,
that's 136 new warnings.  On the other hand, that's 136 places wheree
we may as well *delete the call* to msleep_interruptible.  Since it can
return immediately, the code must be prepared to deal with that ... right?
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: Amol Lad <amol@verismonetworks.com>,
	kernel Janitors <kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org>,
	linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: most users of msleep_interruptible are broken
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 08:16:51 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061011141651.GD27388@parisc-linux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1160571491.3000.372.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>

On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 02:58:11PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > +++ linux-2.6.19-rc1/drivers/mmc/mmc.c	2006-10-11 17:57:02.000000000 +0530
> > @@ -454,7 +454,7 @@ static void mmc_deselect_cards(struct mm
> >  static inline void mmc_delay(unsigned int ms)
> >  {
> >  	if (ms < HZ / 1000) {
> > -		yield();
> > +		cond_resched();
> >  		mdelay(ms);
> 
> 
> this probably wants msleep(), especially with hrtimers comming up; there
> the sleeps are always exact...

They clearly don't care about exactness; they msleep_interruptible and
throw away the return value, so they don't know how long they slept
before they got a signal.

__must_check treatment for msleep_interruptible, anyone?  On the one hand,
that's 136 new warnings.  On the other hand, that's 136 places wheree
we may as well *delete the call* to msleep_interruptible.  Since it can
return immediately, the code must be prepared to deal with that ... right?

  reply	other threads:[~2006-10-11 14:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-10-11 12:45 [PATCH] drivers/mmc/mmc.c: Replacing yield() with a better alternative Amol Lad
2006-10-11 12:57 ` [KJ] [PATCH] drivers/mmc/mmc.c: Replacing yield() with a Amol Lad
2006-10-11 12:58 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-11 12:58   ` [PATCH] drivers/mmc/mmc.c: Replacing yield() with a better alternative Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-11 14:16   ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2006-10-11 14:16     ` most users of msleep_interruptible are broken Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-11 14:20     ` [KJ] " Pierre Ossman
2006-10-11 14:20       ` Pierre Ossman
2006-10-11 14:53       ` [KJ] " Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-11 14:53         ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-11 15:07         ` [KJ] " Pierre Ossman
2006-10-11 15:07           ` Pierre Ossman
2006-10-11 20:30     ` [KJ] " Pavel Machek
2006-10-11 20:30       ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-12  5:54   ` [KJ] [PATCH] drivers/mmc/mmc.c: Replacing yield() with a Nick Piggin
2006-10-12  5:54     ` [PATCH] drivers/mmc/mmc.c: Replacing yield() with a better alternative Nick Piggin
2006-10-16  6:49     ` [KJ] [PATCH] drivers/mmc/mmc.c: Replacing yield() with a Pierre Ossman
2006-10-16  6:49       ` [PATCH] drivers/mmc/mmc.c: Replacing yield() with a better alternative Pierre Ossman
2006-10-22 20:23 ` [KJ] [PATCH] drivers/mmc/mmc.c: Replacing yield() with a Pierre Ossman
2006-10-22 20:23   ` [PATCH] drivers/mmc/mmc.c: Replacing yield() with a better alternative Pierre Ossman

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=20061011141651.GD27388@parisc-linux.org \
    --to=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=amol@verismonetworks.com \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org \
    --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.