From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:58:39 +0000 Subject: Re: [KJ] why so many more "down()" than "down_interruptible()" Message-Id: <200702171458.40276.arnd@arndb.de> List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 17 February 2007 14:00, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > =A0 that's not what i see. =A0just counting the calls under drivers/, it > looks like there's about four times as many calls of down() as > down_interruptible(). =A0is there some reason that the actual stats > differ so markedly from the claim in love's book? =A0just curious. Using down_interruptible is hard: You need to be in a place where you can return -EINTR (or -ERESTART*) to user space, and you need to undo everything that your function did before the down_interruptible failed. Arnd <>< _______________________________________________ Kernel-janitors mailing list Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors