Alan Stern <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Sep 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > > That code could be converted to the kthread API btw.
> > >
> > > Hmph. Near as I can tell, the only changes that would involve are:
> > >
> > > Converting the thread creation call from kernel_thread to
> > > kthread_run.
> > >
> > > Adding another call to wake the thread up once it has been
> > > created.
> > >
> > > Removing the call to daemonize.
> > >
> > > There wouldn't be any need to call kthread_stop -- and in fact it wouldn't
> > > work, as the thread waits on a semaphore while it is idle (kthread_stop
> > > can't cope with things like that).
> >
> > Well I was assuming that the semaphore would go away as well. Kernel
> > threads normally use waitqueues to await more work.
>
> Some kernel threads have a producer-consumer relationship with their
> clients, and it's important that they wake exactly once each time they are
> invoked. A semaphore is the natural way to manage such a thread, but the
> kthread API isn't set up to handle such things. It's possible to make
> this work, by using a manual poor-man's semaphore implementation, but that
> seems ridiculous.
OK.
> Would this patch be acceptable?
Well it makes all kthread_stop() callers pass an additional (unused)
argument. I'd make kthread_stop() and kthread_stop_sem() real C functions,
hide the code sharing within kthread.c.
-
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]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |