On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:05:53PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > I thought try_to_wake_up() was made static to avoid abuse but then again > creating dummy waitqueue is an obvious abuse of waitqueue. What do > other people think? I'll be happy to use try_to_wake_up() directly. Do you need all the extra arguments? The function wake_up_process() is already a wrapper around try_to_wake_up() and is exported, but it doesn't have any arguments other than the task_struct and uses defaults for the other arguments. I'm not sure if anything in your code would break by ignoring the other possible values instead of passing them along from the arguments into the caller. Brad Boyer flar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
