xfs-masters
[Top] [All Lists]

[xfs-masters] Re: [-mm PATCH 2/32] fs: fix-up schedule_timeout() usage

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Subject: [xfs-masters] Re: [-mm PATCH 2/32] fs: fix-up schedule_timeout() usage
From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:40:13 -0700
Cc: xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, sfrench@xxxxxxxxx, sct@xxxxxxxxxx, okir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx, reiserfs-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx, urban@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, nathans@xxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxx, samba-technical@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, reiserfs-list@xxxxxxxxxxx, samba@xxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050815181752.GA23701@xxxxxx>
References: <20050815180514.GC2854@xxxxxxxxxx> <20050815180804.GE2854@xxxxxxxxxx> <20050815181752.GA23701@xxxxxx>
Reply-to: xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xfs-masters-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
On 15.08.2005 [20:17:52 +0200], Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 11:08:04AM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > Description: Use schedule_timeout_{,un}interruptible() instead of
> > set_current_state()/schedule_timeout() to reduce kernel size. Also use
> > helper functions to convert between human time units and jiffies rather
> > than constant HZ division to avoid rounding errors.
> 
> The XFS changes are still wrong for the same rason as last time,
> we actually do want the daemons to do work if they're woken earlier
> using wake_up_process.

Hrm, I got dropped from the Cc list...? No worries, I'm subscribed in
two places :)

I think your reference to "last time" is the KJ patches which probably
used msleep{,_interruptible}() instead of schedule_timeout(). This
patchset, in contrast, should result in *no* functional changes (beyond
some more precisie conversions, where appropriate).
schedule_timeout_interruptible(some_value), for instance is nothing more than:

        set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
        schedule_timeout(some_value);

Just in the form of a combine function call. No loops like msleep() &
co.

Is the patch still a problem?

Thanks,
Nish


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>