From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Frederic Weisbecker Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 10:53:14 +0000 Subject: Re: Lots of bugs with current->state = TASK_*INTERRUPTIBLE Message-Id: <20100121105311.GB5017@nowhere> List-Id: References: <1263932978.31321.53.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <1263935333.4561.26.camel@frodo> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Julia Lawall Cc: Steven Rostedt , LKML , kernel-janitors , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH , Andy Whitcroft On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 11:47:41AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > What about something like the following (drivers/macintosh/adb.c): > > add_wait_queue(&state->wait_queue, &wait); > current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; > > for (;;) { > req = state->completed; > if (req != NULL) > state->completed = req->next; > else if (atomic_read(&state->n_pending) = 0) > ret = -EIO; > if (req != NULL || ret != 0) > break; > > if (file->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK) { > ret = -EAGAIN; > break; > } > if (signal_pending(current)) { > ret = -ERESTARTSYS; > break; > } > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&state->lock, flags); > schedule(); > spin_lock_irqsave(&state->lock, flags); > } > > current->state = TASK_RUNNING; > remove_wait_queue(&state->wait_queue, &wait); > > There is a call to schedule eventually after the first current->state > assignment, but it is not right after. Looks fine as spin_unlock includes a memory barrier, IIRC.