Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait) implementation

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Boqun,

On 10/26/2015 01:04 PM, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 09:28:07AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * The thing about the wake_up_state() return value; I think we can ignore it.
>> + *
>> + * If for some reason it would return 0, that means the previously waiting
>> + * task is already running, so it will observe condition true (or has already).
>> + */
>> +void swake_up_locked(struct swait_queue_head *q)
>> +{
>> +	struct swait_queue *curr;
>> +
>> +	list_for_each_entry(curr, &q->task_list, task_list) {
>> +		wake_up_process(curr->task);
>> +		list_del_init(&curr->task_list);
>> +		break;
> 
> Just be curious, what's this break for? Or what's this loop(?) for?

I have to guess here, since Peter wrote it. It looks like the function
is based on __wake_up_common(). Though I agree the loop is not necessary
and something like below should the trick. Unless I do not see something
important.

	void swake_up_locked(struct swait_queue_head *q)
	{
		struct swait_queue *curr;

		if (list_emtpy(&q))
			return;

		curr = list_first_entry(&q, typeof(*curr), task_list);
		wake_up_process(curr->task);
		list_del_init(&curr->task_list);
	}

If Peter is not complaining I change swake_up_locked() for the next version.

Thanks,
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [RT Stable]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux