From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
hch@infradead.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>,
Ron Minnich <rminnich@sandia.gov>,
v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:58:14 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0808260954040.3363@nehalem.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48B40C2F.3050700@gmail.com>
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> This patch converts poll/select to use custom wake up function and use
> separate triggered variable to synchronize against wake up events.
> The only added overhead is an extra function call during wake up and
> negligible.
I don't really see the point.
poll() isn't allowed to sleep for many reasons. Some are technical. But
the most obvious one is that a sleeping "poll()" is totally against the
whole point of polling in the first place!
So is there some big conceptual reason to change how poll() has always
worked?
If you worry about debuggability, then we could just add a
preempt_enable();
..
preempt_disable();
around the poll calls (purely for catching errors) to get a big warning if
somebody tries to call a sleepable function.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-26 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-26 13:57 [PATCH 1/2] wait: kill is_sync_wait() Tejun Heo
2008-08-26 13:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep Tejun Heo
2008-08-26 16:58 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2008-08-26 17:48 ` Tejun Heo
2008-08-26 19:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-08-26 20:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-26 14:09 ` [PATCH 1/2] wait: kill is_sync_wait() Ingo Molnar
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=alpine.LFD.1.10.0808260954040.3363@nehalem.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ericvh@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rminnich@sandia.gov \
--cc=v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/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