On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:32:58 +0300 Pavel Shilovsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> to let us interrupt the proccess if the session went down and echo > is disabled. > > Signed-off-by: Pavel Shilovsky <[email protected]> > --- > fs/cifs/transport.c | 7 ++++++- > 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/cifs/transport.c b/fs/cifs/transport.c > index fa93720..938d20b 100644 > --- a/fs/cifs/transport.c > +++ b/fs/cifs/transport.c > @@ -257,6 +257,8 @@ smb_send(struct TCP_Server_Info *server, struct smb_hdr > *smb_buffer, > static int > wait_for_free_request(struct TCP_Server_Info *server, const int long_op) > { > + int rc; > + > spin_lock(&server->req_lock); > > if (long_op == CIFS_ASYNC_OP) { > @@ -271,8 +273,11 @@ wait_for_free_request(struct TCP_Server_Info *server, > const int long_op) > if (server->credits <= 0) { > spin_unlock(&server->req_lock); > cifs_num_waiters_inc(server); > - wait_event(server->request_q, get_credits(server) > 0); > + rc = wait_event_interruptible(server->request_q, > + get_credits(server) > 0); > cifs_num_waiters_dec(server); > + if (rc) > + return rc; > spin_lock(&server->req_lock); > } else { > if (server->tcpStatus == CifsExiting) { In general, I think making this interruptible is a good idea. The problem here though is that you're going to end up interrupting this on any signal. That includes stuff like SIGCHLD -- you don't necessarily want to interrupt this because the process forked off a child earlier and then that child exited... It's probably simpler to just make this a TASK_KILLABLE sleep for that reason, rather than trying to handle different signals differently. -- Jeff Layton <[email protected]> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
