public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Pierre Ossman <drzeus-list@drzeus.cx>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make prepare_namespace() wait for devices
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 08:51:14 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070531085114.420b9cbe.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <465EAF90.3030803@drzeus.cx>

On Thu, 31 May 2007 13:20:48 +0200 Pierre Ossman <drzeus-list@drzeus.cx> wrote:
>

(top-posting reversed)

> Pierre Ossman wrote:
> > Andrew Morton wrote:
> >> Whatever.  I think you can work it out ;)   
> >>
> >>   
> > 
> > Bare with me, I just woke up ;)
> > 
> >> while (driver_probe_done() || (ROOT_DEV = name_to_dev_t(...)) == 0)
> >>
> >> perhaps?
> >>
> >> The loop-which-sleeps within a loop-which-sleeps seems poorly thought out?
> >>   
> > 
> > I'd say a matter of taste. I'm not a big fan och cramming things into
> > the while() clause.
> > 
> > The idea with the double loops was to keep this thread asleep when we
> > could detect meaningful work elsewhere in the kernel. You could just
> > remove the inner-most loop if it offends you. :)
> > 
>
> What was the verdict here? Were you satisfied with this or do you need a change?


I was kinda hoing to see version #2 with that funny loop cleaned up a bit?



  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-31 15:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-24 12:21 [PATCH] Make prepare_namespace() wait for devices Pierre Ossman
2007-05-24 18:35 ` Olaf Hering
2007-05-24 20:46   ` Pierre Ossman
2007-05-25  0:06 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-25  4:03   ` Pierre Ossman
2007-05-25  4:17     ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-25  4:31       ` Pierre Ossman
2007-05-31 11:20         ` Pierre Ossman
2007-05-31 15:51           ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2007-06-01  5:24             ` Pierre Ossman
2007-06-01  6:40               ` Andrew Morton
2007-06-01  6:51                 ` Pierre Ossman

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=20070531085114.420b9cbe.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=drzeus-list@drzeus.cx \
    --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