Re: [RFC PATCH(experimental) 2/2] Fix freezer-kthread_stop race

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

On Friday, 20 April 2007 20:31, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > > > I mean, we already have four of them (PF_NOFREEZE, PF_FROZEN, 
> > > > PF_FREEZER_SKIP, TIF_FREEZE), and you will need to introduce two 
> > > > more for the freezer-based CPU hotplug, so if yet another one is 
> > > > needed, that will make up almost a separate u8 field ...
> > > 
> > > I am perfectly ok with it. But I am not sure if everybody would 
> > > agree to have another field in the task struct, though in this case 
> > > it does make sense :-)
> > 
> > OK by me.  You might want to consider making that fields's locking 
> > protocol be set_bit(), clear_bit(), etc rather than task_lock().
> 
> is OK to me too, the extra field isnt a problem.

OK, so I'll try to prepare a patch introducing it over the weekend. :-)

Greetings,
Rafael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/