From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
axboe@kernel.dk, jmoyer@redhat.com, Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v3] wait: add wait_event_lock_irq() interface
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 02:48:42 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121130024842.5326d998.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1354272161-9173-1-git-send-email-lczerner@redhat.com>
On Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:42:40 +0100 Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com> wrote:
> New wait_event{_interruptible}_lock_irq{_cmd} macros added. This commit
> moves the private wait_event_lock_irq() macro from MD to regular wait
> includes, introduces new macro wait_event_lock_irq_cmd() instead of using
> the old method with omitting cmd parameter which is ugly and makes a use
> of new macros in the MD. It also introduces the _interruptible_ variant.
>
> The use of new interface is when one have a special lock to protect data
> structures used in the condition, or one also needs to invoke "cmd"
> before putting it to sleep.
>
> All new macros are expected to be called with the lock taken. The lock
> is released before sleep and is reacquired afterwards. We will leave the
> macro with the lock held.
>
> Note to DM: IMO this should also fix theoretical race on waitqueue while
> using simultaneously wait_event_lock_irq() and wait_event() because of
> lack of locking around current state setting and wait queue removal.
Does this fix the sparse warning which Fengguang just sent us?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-30 10:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-30 10:42 [PATCH 1/2 v3] wait: add wait_event_lock_irq() interface Lukas Czerner
2012-11-30 10:42 ` [PATCH 2/2 v6] loop: Limit the number of requests in the bio list Lukas Czerner
2012-11-30 13:57 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-11-30 10:48 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2012-11-30 11:36 ` [PATCH 1/2 v3] wait: add wait_event_lock_irq() interface Lukáš Czerner
2012-11-30 20:13 ` Andrew Morton
2012-12-03 9:21 ` Lukáš Czerner
2012-11-30 21:43 ` Andrew Morton
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=20121130024842.5326d998.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/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).