From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964959AbWH2Lur (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Aug 2006 07:50:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964957AbWH2Lur (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Aug 2006 07:50:47 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:60129 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964959AbWH2Luq (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Aug 2006 07:50:46 -0400 Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:50:44 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Cedric Le Goater Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Neil Brown , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [NFS] kthread: update lockd to use kthread Message-ID: <20060829115044.GA26794@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Cedric Le Goater , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Neil Brown , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net References: <44EEA5E5.6000509@fr.ibm.com> <20060825135824.GA10659@infradead.org> <44EF2E6F.1040905@fr.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44EF2E6F.1040905@fr.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 07:07:59PM +0200, Cedric Le Goater wrote: > This kernel thread is a sub thread of the lockd thread. It's a bit more > simple and does not require as much modification. It still depends on the > way its parent is killed and it will require some more work when the sunrpc > thread are fixed. Yes, the whole sunrpc/nfs thread situation is rather difficult. > The SIGKILL used to terminate the threads is a challenge ... it propagates > to sub threads. Some other stuff that bother me in using the kthread api in > sunrpc : nfs_callback_down() uses a wait on a completion with a timeout. > This is not possible with the kthread but might not be really useful. dunno. The usage look buggy to me because we can't guarantee thread exit. But I really don't even understand the requirements for those threads yet, I wish someone could write up a coherent description.