>
> > Now, if I call kthread_stop() in module unload time, does that code
> > run in user process context just like system calls do? That is
> > important, because if it cannot sleep, it would deadlock.
> >
>
> Not relevent. You have apparently made up your mind that you
> need to do it "your" way. Fine.
No, no, that is not MY way. That is the 2.6 way.
(see http://lwn.net/Articles/64444/).
With the old API (kernel_thread) there was no way (at least, direct
way) to bind a thread to a cpu, which i actually need. And this is not
MY own approach , it is used throught the kernel:
* migration thread at sched.c:
http://lxr.linux.no/source/kernel/sched.c#L4196
* ksoftirqd thread at softirq.c:
http://lxr.linux.no/source/kernel/softirq.c#L350
* worker thread used in workqueues:
http://lxr.linux.no/source/kernel/workqueue.c#L182
...and so on
All these threads are standard and well debugged, and all use the API
which I was talking about. Of course, as they are included in the
official kernel sources, none of them is stopped at module unload
time.
Thus, all I want to know is why kthread_stop() cant be called at
module unload time, if the cleanup code can sleep and if there is a
workaround for that.
I hope my questions are clearer now.
Thanks for your help
Aritz
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
