On Friday 14 July 2006 01:37, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:18:43 +1000
> Nigel Cunningham <nigel at suspend2.net> 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 <nigel at suspend2.net>
> >
> > 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
