Hi,
Please consider applying.
Description: Use msleep() instead of schedule_timeout() to guarantee the task
delays as expected. The current code uses TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; however, it does
not check for signals, so I do not think the change to msleep() is necessarily
bad.
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- 2.6.11-rc1-kj-v/fs/jfs/jfs_logmgr.c 2005-01-15 16:55:41.000000000 -0800
+++ 2.6.11-rc1-kj/fs/jfs/jfs_logmgr.c 2005-01-18 10:53:46.000000000 -0800
@@ -67,6 +67,7 @@
#include <linux/buffer_head.h> /* for sync_blockdev() */
#include <linux/bio.h>
#include <linux/suspend.h>
+#include <linux/delay.h>
#include "jfs_incore.h"
#include "jfs_filsys.h"
#include "jfs_metapage.h"
@@ -1612,8 +1613,7 @@ void jfs_flush_journal(struct jfs_log *l
*/
if ((!list_empty(&log->cqueue)) || !list_empty(&log->synclist)) {
for (i = 0; i < 800; i++) { /* Too much? */
- current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
- schedule_timeout(HZ / 4);
+ msleep(250);
if (list_empty(&log->cqueue) &&
list_empty(&log->synclist))
break;
_______________________________________________
Jfs-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/jfs-discussion
