From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
arjan@linux.intel.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
hch@infradead.org, mingo@elte.hu, rminnich@sandia.gov,
ericvh@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH fwd] poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 10:53:56 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081122105356.87856d04.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4927FE87.6050005@gmail.com>
On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:43:51 +0900 Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com> wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 09:58:33AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> >> +int poll_schedule_timeout(struct poll_wqueues *pwq, int state,
> >> + ktime_t *expires, unsigned long slack)
> >
> > All callers of poll_schedule() and poll_schedule_timeout() pass
> > TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE. We can elide the 'state' argument.
>
> Well, I wanted to keep it as to keep it more consistent with other
> schedule() functions but both Miklos and you don't seem to like it, so I
> might as well just drop it. Andrew, what do you think?
I guess that if any poll/select syscall were to sleep in
uninterruptible state, people would get upset about the effect upon their
load average and we'd have to go in and fix it.
So, yup, I expect that hard-coding TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE would be OK.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-22 18:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-22 8:58 [PATCH fwd] poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep Miklos Szeredi
2008-11-22 9:27 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-22 12:39 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-11-22 12:43 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-22 18:53 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-11-23 1:26 ` poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep, take #3 Tejun Heo
2008-11-23 2:35 ` Davide Libenzi
2008-11-23 3:05 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-23 3:34 ` Brad Boyer
2008-11-23 3:48 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-23 8:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 9:14 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-23 9:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 9:43 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-23 9:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-24 4:29 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-24 4:57 ` Davide Libenzi
2008-11-24 5:05 ` Davide Libenzi
2008-11-24 6:09 ` [PATCH] poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep, take #4 Tejun Heo
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=20081122105356.87856d04.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ericvh@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rminnich@sandia.gov \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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.