Hello mulyadi, Thanks for replying, sorry for late response comments are inline below On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Mulyadi Santosa <mulyadi.santosa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:12 PM, Devesh Sharma <devesh28@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hello list, >> >> Consider a case where I have a workqueue, a work is submitted to a it >> from some interrupt handler >> Lets say, some where in a code, it tries to get some semaphore to >> enter into a critical section, >> and fails to get it, sholud I still return from the work function by >> returning ERESTARTSYS? >> Kindly somebody clarify this to me > > To the best I know, when you fail to get semaphore, your code path > will be blocked. Since you use workqueue which is able to sleep > safely, I think you don't need to return ERESTARTSYS. The workqueue > will sleep and try to reacquire the semaphore. Do you mean there will not be any difference if I use down_interruptible() or down() because in workqueue context there is no way to send signal hence both will be equivalant? So one must be careful while designing semaphore/mutexs+workqueue because it can lead it to infinite sleep? > > regards, > > Mulyadi. > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with "unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxx Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ
