From: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
arjan@linux.intel.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
hch@infradead.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
rminnich@sandia.gov, ericvh@gmail.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep, take #3
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:05:53 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4928C891.80405@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0811221831550.19456@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2008, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
>> +static int pollwake(wait_queue_t *wait, unsigned mode, int sync, void *key)
>> +{
>> + struct poll_wqueues *pwq = wait->private;
>> + DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(dummy_wait, pwq->polling_task);
>> +
>> + set_mb(pwq->triggered, 1);
>> +
>> + /* perform the default wake up operation */
>> + return default_wake_function(&dummy_wait, mode, sync, key);
>> +}
>
> Wouldn't it be nicer to un-static try_to_wake_up() (or a wrapper) instead
> of setting up a fake wait queue just to use default_wake_function(), just
> to wake up a task?
I thought try_to_wake_up() was made static to avoid abuse but then again
creating dummy waitqueue is an obvious abuse of waitqueue. What do
other people think? I'll be happy to use try_to_wake_up() directly.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-23 3:05 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
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 [this message]
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=4928C891.80405@gmail.com \
--to=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=ericvh@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).