On Friday 14 July 2006 01:37, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:18:43 +1000
> Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Compiling in the rt-tester currently makes freezing processes fail.
> > I don't think there's anything wrong with it running during
> > suspending, so adding PF_NOFREEZE to the flags set seems to be the
> > right solution.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
> >
> > rtmutex-tester.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > diff -ruNp 9971-rt-tester.patch-old/kernel/rtmutex-tester.c 9971-rt-tester.patch-new/kernel/rtmutex-tester.c
> > --- 9971-rt-tester.patch-old/kernel/rtmutex-tester.c 2006-07-07 10:27:46.000000000 +1000
> > +++ 9971-rt-tester.patch-new/kernel/rtmutex-tester.c 2006-07-14 07:48:01.000000000 +1000
> > @@ -259,7 +259,7 @@ static int test_func(void *data)
> > struct test_thread_data *td = data;
> > int ret;
> >
> > - current->flags |= PF_MUTEX_TESTER;
> > + current->flags |= PF_MUTEX_TESTER | PF_NOFREEZE;
> > allow_signal(SIGHUP);
> >
> > for(;;) {
>
>
> I yesterday queued up the below patch. Which approach is most appropriate?
I prefer the one that makes these threads freeze (ie. the Luca's patch).
Greetings,
Rafael
-
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]
