From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: domen@coderock.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] include/delay: replace msleep{,_interruptible}() with macros
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 17:26:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041120012623.GH6181@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041120012153.GE6181@us.ibm.com>
On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 05:21:53PM -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 05:17:51PM -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 06:49:44PM -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > After some pretty heavy discussion on IRC, I felt that it may be
> > > important / useful to bring the discussion of schedule_timeout() to
> > > LKML. There are two issues being considered:
> > >
> > > 1) msleep_interruptible()
> > >
> > > For reference, here is the code for this function:
> > >
> > > /**
> > > * msleep_interruptible - sleep waiting for waitqueue interruptions
> > > * @msecs: Time in milliseconds to sleep for
> > > */
> > > unsigned long msleep_interruptible(unsigned int msecs)
> > > {
> > > unsigned long timeout = msecs_to_jiffies(msecs);
> > >
> > > while (timeout && !signal_pending(current)) {
> > > set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> > > timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout);
> > > }
> > > return jiffies_to_msecs(timeout);
> > > }
> > >
> > > The first issue deals with whether the while() loop is at all necessary.
> > > From my understanding (primarily from how the code "should" behave, but
> > > also backed up by code itself), I think the following code:
> > >
> > > set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> > > timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout);
> > >
> > > should be interpreted as:
> > >
> > > a) I wish to sleep for timeout jiffies; however
> > > b) If a signal occurs before timeout jiffies have gone by, I
> > > would also like to wake up.
> > >
> > > With this interpretation, though, the while()-conditional becomes
> > > questionable. I can see two cases (think inclusive OR not exclusive) for
> > > schedule_timeout() returning:
> > >
> > > a) A signal was received and thus signal_pending(current) will
> > > be true, exiting the loop. In this case, timeout will be
> > > some non-negative value (0 is a corner case, I believe, where
> > > both the timer fires and a signal is received in the last jiffy).
> > > b) The timer in schedule_timeout() has expired and thus it will
> > > return 0. This indicates the function has delayed the requested
> > > time (at least) and timeout will be set to 0, again exiting the
> > > loop.
> > >
> > > Clearly, then, if my interpretion is correct, schedule_timeout() will
> > > always return to a state in msleep_interruptible() which causes the loop
> > > to only iterate the one time. Does this make sense? Is my interpretation
> > > of schedule_timeout()s functioning somehow flawed? If not, we probably
> > > can go ahead and change the msleep_interruptible() code, yes?
> >
> > Here is the function variant of the previous patches.
>
> Here is the corresponding change to delay.h. The major difference from
> the macro version is that a flag is now passed to __msleep_sig() to
> determine whether an extra condition is necessary in the while() loop.
>
> -Nish
>
> Description: Add macros for various sleep functions, one for each case
> of:
>
> Description: Remove prototypes of msleep() and msleep_interruptible() to
> prepare for the macro versions of these functions. Add prototypes for
> __msleep_wq() and __msleep_sig(). Add macros for 4 types of sleeps:
> 1) Unconditional sleep (msleep)
> 2) Sleep until signalled (msleep_interruptible)
> 3) Sleep until wait-queue event (msleep_wq)
> 4) Sleep until either signalled or wait-queue event
> (msleep_wq_interruptible)
> These 4 cases are all distinct and handled separately by passing
> appropriate flags to __msleep_sig and __msleep_wq, which should *not*
> ever be called directly by kernel code.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
>
>
> --- 2.6.10-rc2-vanilla/include/linux/delay.h 2004-11-19 16:11:52.000000000 -0800
> +++ 2.6.10-rc2/include/linux/delay.h 2004-11-19 17:12:47.000000000 -0800
> @@ -38,8 +38,31 @@ extern unsigned long loops_per_jiffy;
> #define ndelay(x) udelay(((x)+999)/1000)
> #endif
>
> -void msleep(unsigned int msecs);
> -unsigned long msleep_interruptible(unsigned int msecs);
> +unsigned int __msleep_sig(unsigned int msecs, long state, int check_sigs);
> +unsigned int __msleep_wq(unsigned int msecs, long state);
> +
> +/*
> + * Sleep until at least msecs ms have elapsed
> + */
> +#define msleep(msecs) (void)__msleep_sig(msecs, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, 0)
> +
> +/*
> + * Sleep until at least msecs ms have elapsed or a signal is received
> + */
> +#define msleep_interruptible(msecs) \
> + __msleep_sig(msecs, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 1))
> +
> +/*
> + * Sleep until at least msecs ms have elapsed or a wait-queue event occurs
> + */
> +#define msleep_wq(msecs) __msleep_wq_state(msecs, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
> +
> +/*
> + * Sleep until at least msecs ms have elapsed or a wait-queue event occurs
> + * or a signal is received
> + */
> +#define msleep_wq_interruptible(msecs) \
> + __msleep_wq_state(msecs, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
A stupid typo...
Description: Remove prototypes of msleep() and msleep_interruptible() to
prepare for the macro versions of these functions. Add prototypes for
__msleep_wq() and __msleep_sig(). Add macros for 4 types of sleeps:
1) Unconditional sleep (msleep)
2) Sleep until signalled (msleep_interruptible)
3) Sleep until wait-queue event (msleep_wq)
4) Sleep until either signalled or wait-queue event
(msleep_wq_interruptible)
These 4 cases are all distinct and handled separately by passing
appropriate flags to __msleep_sig and __msleep_wq, which should *not*
ever be called directly by kernel code.
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
--- 2.6.10-rc2-vanilla/include/linux/delay.h 2004-11-19 16:11:52.000000000 -0800
+++ 2.6.10-rc2/include/linux/delay.h 2004-11-19 17:12:47.000000000 -0800
@@ -38,8 +38,31 @@ extern unsigned long loops_per_jiffy;
#define ndelay(x) udelay(((x)+999)/1000)
#endif
-void msleep(unsigned int msecs);
-unsigned long msleep_interruptible(unsigned int msecs);
+unsigned int __msleep_sig(unsigned int msecs, long state, int check_sigs);
+unsigned int __msleep_wq(unsigned int msecs, long state);
+
+/*
+ * Sleep until at least msecs ms have elapsed
+ */
+#define msleep(msecs) (void)__msleep_sig(msecs, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, 0)
+
+/*
+ * Sleep until at least msecs ms have elapsed or a signal is received
+ */
+#define msleep_interruptible(msecs) \
+ __msleep_sig(msecs, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 1))
+
+/*
+ * Sleep until at least msecs ms have elapsed or a wait-queue event occurs
+ */
+#define msleep_wq(msecs) __msleep_wq_state(msecs, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
+
+/*
+ * Sleep until at least msecs ms have elapsed or a wait-queue event occurs
+ * or a signal is received
+ */
+#define msleep_wq_interruptible(msecs) \
+ __msleep_wq_state(msecs, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
static inline void ssleep(unsigned int seconds)
{
prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-20 1:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-17 2:49 schedule_timeout() issues / questions Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-11-20 0:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] kernel/timer.c: remove msleep() and msleep_interruptible() Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-11-20 0:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] include/delay.h: replace msleep() and msleep_interruptible() with macros Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-11-20 1:23 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-11-20 1:25 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
[not found] ` <200411201037.22237.oliver@neukum.org>
2004-11-22 18:01 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
[not found] ` <200411221934.53425.oliver@neukum.org>
2004-11-22 19:50 ` [PATCH ] kernel/timer: correct msleep_interruptible() comment Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-11-20 0:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] kernel/timer.c: remove msleep() and msleep_interruptible() Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-11-20 1:17 ` [PATCH 1/2] kernel/timer: remove msleep{,_interruptible}(); add __msleep_{sig,wq}() Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-11-20 1:21 ` [PATCH 2/2] include/delay: replace msleep{,_interruptible}() with macros Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-11-20 1:26 ` Nishanth Aravamudan [this message]
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=20041120012623.GH6181@us.ibm.com \
--to=nacc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=domen@coderock.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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