Re: [PATCH] dio: lock refcount operations

> I don't believe that this can happen.

Yeah, I think my brain made the leap to spurious wake-ups from hashed
wait queues.  Which aren't being used :).  As long as it's a private
wait queue and sleeps and sleeps with UNINTERRUPTIBLE it seems ok.

Do you think the cleanup shouldn't be done?  It seems easier to
understand after the patch, and makes dio_await_one() pretty darn
straight forward.

- z
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] dio: lock refcount operations
    • From: Jeff Moyer <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] dio: lock refcount operations
    • From: Zach Brown <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] dio: lock refcount operations
    • From: Jeff Moyer <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: linux-2.6.19-rc2 tg3 problem
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/2] kconfig.debug menu dependencies
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] dio: lock refcount operations
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] dio: lock refcount operations
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]