From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: dedekind1@gmail.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, dwmw2@infradead.org,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: Replace yield() with cond_resched()
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 12:59:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FA8FC83.7000503@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1336467723.23308.23.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1150 bytes --]
Am 08.05.2012 11:02, schrieb Artem Bityutskiy:
> On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 10:26 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> The comment above yield()'s definition says:
>> * If you want to use yield() to wait for something, use wait_event().
>> * If you want to use yield() to be 'nice' for others, use cond_resched().
>> * If you still want to use yield(), do not!
>>
>> The yield() usage of UBI really looks like the "be nice for others" case,
>> so use cond_resched().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
>> CC: peterz@infradead.org
>
> I guess we would better sleep for a couple of hundreds of milliseconds
> instead.
So, you'd prefer a msleep_interruptible(500) instead of yield() in this case?
> The purpose was different. If we have I/O error, we hope it is a
> transient failure. E.g., the HW is temporary unavailable because of an
> internal issue. And with yield() we hoped to schedule away for longer
> time than usual and let other processes which may affect that HW go
> forward and do something.
Okay, yield() is clearly the wrong choice here.
cond_resched() is better.
Thanks,
//richard
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-08 10:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-08 8:26 [PATCH] UBI: Replace yield() with cond_resched() Richard Weinberger
2012-05-08 8:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-08 9:02 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-05-08 10:59 ` Richard Weinberger [this message]
2012-05-08 13:23 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-05-08 13:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=4FA8FC83.7000503@nod.at \
--to=richard@nod.at \
--cc=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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