From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935103AbeAHQny (ORCPT + 1 other); Mon, 8 Jan 2018 11:43:54 -0500 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:50114 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932623AbeAHQnx (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jan 2018 11:43:53 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 1314 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 08 Jan 2018 11:43:52 EST Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 16:21:50 +0000 (GMT) From: James Simmons To: Greg Kroah-Hartman cc: NeilBrown , Oleg Drokin , Andreas Dilger , lkml , lustre Subject: Re: [PATCH 5 v2: 00/19] staging: lustre: use standard wait_event macros In-Reply-To: <20180108145943.GA5761@kroah.com> Message-ID: References: <151538168618.23920.8261096424342988792.stgit@noble> <20180108145943.GA5761@kroah.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LFD 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20180108_162150_714129_DFB06320 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 25.34 ) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: > On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 02:28:13PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > Hi, > > this is a revised version of the patch series I sent under a similar > > subject in mid December. > > Improvements are: > > - new wait_event_idle* macros are now in include/linux/wait.h which > > Ack from peterz. > > - *all* waits are now TASK_IDLE or TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and so don't > > affect the load average. There is no need to choose whether load > > is appropriate or not in each case. > > - all l_wait_event() users are handled so l_wait_event() is > > removed. The one case I had left out before uses > > wait_event_idle_exclusive() with and option of using > > wait_event_idle_exclusive_lifo() is that ever gets approved. > > > > I think this set is ready to go. > > If you only review two patches, please review > > > > staging: lustre: simplify waiting in ldlm_completion_ast() > > and > > staging: lustre: remove back_to_sleep() > > > > as in both of those, the actual behaviour of the current code (as I > > understand it) doesn't seem to agree with comments/debug message, or > > just generally looks odd. > > This series broke the build, so I'll roll back my tree and drop it. > > Please fix it up and resend and test build it first... Please don't merge these just yet. They need to be tested first. I don't want to be in a position where the lustre client is totally not usable like in the past. That kind of breakage makes no one want to use the lustre client. We have a test suite for these kinds of changes. Neill do you know how to test your patches with the test suite? Also I have been working on several things for the last 4 months to merge upstream. I like to coordinate with you so we don't step on each others toes.