From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764788AbYEHSa7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2008 14:30:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755045AbYEHSap (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2008 14:30:45 -0400 Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.142.189]:56575 "EHLO ti-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753445AbYEHSan (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2008 14:30:43 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=mxjuLJ3It6dHCPXPEPpg62sFAhJx6fP5SFHGCvyTCGXFqfhFVXQrqKrX633pe944cpGiNxGwuF/AKw5HBwG19UYaGq6B03cDNU/bgwP0i1llRx1aGxSbO+qsQs148SJr8z+FWqjJd2kNxG2N6pnSWOZZ5XdWgeRvXrXKfyoBf30= Message-ID: <91b13c310805081130s389195c1h8970290a8a34009a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 02:30:41 +0800 From: "rae l" To: "Steven Whitehouse" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [fs-devel] the real needs of just_schedule Cc: "Al Viro" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1210252312.3635.484.camel@quoit> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1210096264-27426-1-git-send-email-crquan@gmail.com> <1210252312.3635.484.camel@quoit> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Steven Whitehouse wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 2008-05-07 at 01:51 +0800, Denis Cheng wrote: > > there are some situations which really need a just schedule, > > with int return value; > > and this should be moved into lib/ in the future. > > > > Signed-off-by: Denis Cheng > > --- > > fs/inode.c | 2 +- > > include/linux/writeback.h | 16 ++++++++++++---- > > 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c > > index bf64781..b355a44 100644 > > --- a/fs/inode.c > > +++ b/fs/inode.c > > @@ -1291,7 +1291,7 @@ int inode_needs_sync(struct inode *inode) > > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(inode_needs_sync); > > > > -int inode_wait(void *word) > > +int just_schedule(void *word) > > { > > schedule(); > > return 0; > > diff --git a/include/linux/writeback.h b/include/linux/writeback.h > > index f462439..80ff5eb 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/writeback.h > > +++ b/include/linux/writeback.h > > @@ -67,23 +67,31 @@ struct writeback_control { > > > > /* > > * fs/fs-writeback.c > > - */ > > + */ > > void writeback_inodes(struct writeback_control *wbc); > > -int inode_wait(void *); > > void sync_inodes_sb(struct super_block *, int wait); > > void sync_inodes(int wait); > > > > +/* > > + * fs/inode.c > > + * > > + * there are some situations which really need a just schedule, > > + * with int return value; > > + * and this should be moved into lib/ in the future. > > + */ > > +int just_schedule(void *); > > + > Why is now not a good time? :-) > > The patches look ok to me otherwise, but I wonder whether I should put > them in my tree (since they affect core code) or whether they'd be > better in -mm and/or linux-next? The inode_wait in fs core code(fs/inode.c) is really just_schedule, so is the gdlm_ast_wait, and they are all fs related code; But inode_wait is not a better name for its work, instead just_schedule won. So I should ask for opinions from fs core crew, BTW, today I did a grep among the whole kernel tree and found that just_schedule is also useful to other code, such as: key_wait_bit(security/keys/request_key.c:25) It's also really a just_schedule. So just_schedule should go to lib/ ? Or we just append it into kernel/sched.c? > > Steve. -- Denis Cheng