From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752740Ab1IUQBi (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:01:38 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:35533 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752507Ab1IUQBg (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:01:36 -0400 Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 08:54:44 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Kautuk Consul Cc: Jiri Kosina , jkosina@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Trivial: devtmpfsd: Setting task running/interruptible states Message-ID: <20110921155444.GA27121@suse.de> References: <1316619573-9104-1-git-send-email-consul.kautuk@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1316619573-9104-1-git-send-email-consul.kautuk@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 09:09:33PM +0530, Kautuk Consul wrote: > This trivial patch makes the following changes in devtmpfsd() : This is not the definition of "trivial" in that you are changing the logic of the code, not just doing spelling changes. > - Set the state to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE using __set_current_state > instead of set_current_state as the spin_unlock is an implicit > memory barrier. Why? What is this hurting with the original code? > - After return from schedule(), there is no need to set the current > state to TASK_RUNNING as the wake_up_process() function call will > do this for us. Are you sure? Have you tested this patch and everything works properly? greg k-h