From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Andrew Patterson <andrew.patterson@hp.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
mike.miller@hp.com, jens.axboe@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] cciss: use only one scan thread
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:33:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090715213348.0805073f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1247717759.25954.75.camel@grinch>
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 04:15:59 +0000 Andrew Patterson <andrew.patterson@hp.com> wrote:
> > > +}
> >
> > We already did init_completion(h->scan_wait) at startup time? Doing
> > the INIT_COMPLETION() here looks unusual and is hopefully unnecessary.
> >
>
> I am following the text in the "Linux Device Drivers 3rd Edition section
> 5.4:
>
> "A completion is normally a one-shot device; it is used once then
> discarded. It is possible, however, to reuse completion structures if
> proper care is taken. If complete_all is not used, a completion
> structure can be reused without any problems as long as there is no
> ambiguity about what event is being signalled. If you use complete_all,
> however, you must reinitialize the completion structure before reusing
> it. The macro:
>
> INIT_COMPLETION(struct completion c);
>
> can be used to quickly perform this reinitialization."
>
> It there are better way to do this? INIT_COMPLETION() currently just
> sets done = 0.
OK, I'd assumed that a full wait_for_completion()/complete() operation
would leave the completion in ready-to-use-again state.
But wait_for_completion_interruptible() can indeed leave
completion.done in a non-zero state if it was interrupted by a signal.
hm. Perhaps so the caller can run wait_for_completion*() again.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-16 4:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-14 22:02 [PATCH 0/3] cciss rmmod/scan-thread fixes Andrew Patterson
2009-07-14 22:02 ` [PATCH 1/3] cciss: remove logical drive sysfs entries during driver cleanup Andrew Patterson
2009-07-14 22:02 ` [PATCH 2/3] cciss: use only one scan thread Andrew Patterson
2009-07-15 22:06 ` Andrew Morton
2009-07-16 4:15 ` Andrew Patterson
2009-07-16 4:33 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-07-14 22:02 ` [PATCH 3/3] cciss: kick off logical drive topology rescan through sysfs Andrew Patterson
2009-07-15 22:08 ` [PATCH 0/3] cciss rmmod/scan-thread fixes Andrew Morton
2009-07-16 5:45 ` Andrew Patterson
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=20090715213348.0805073f.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrew.patterson@hp.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mike.miller@hp.com \
/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.