On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 06:49:21PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> If you can come up with a proper use case, i.e. patch for a module,
> then we can certainly talk about the exports. But without a user it
> does not make any sense.
My module is currently out of the tree, so obviously
On Thu, 9 Jul 2015, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:05:02AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > > This patch should definitely help most modules.
> >
> > And how exactly would this help modules?
>
> Putting kthread to sleep and waking them up later is slightly
>
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:05:02AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > This patch should definitely help most modules.
>
> And how exactly would this help modules?
Putting kthread to sleep and waking them up later is slightly
tricky :
On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 11:23:41PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
> On 07/08/2015 08:40 PM, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The kthread park/unpark facility is not used in the kernel
>
> kernel/smpboot.c ?
Got me, I should have said hardly used.
Sorry for the gross
On Wed, 8 Jul 2015, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> The kthread park/unpark facility is not used in the kernel, so
git grep kthread.*park tells a different story
> one would assume that it's made for kernel modules.
Certainly not.
> This patch should definitely help most modules.
And how exactly
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:05:02AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
This patch should definitely help most modules.
And how exactly would this help modules?
Putting kthread to sleep and waking them up later is slightly
tricky :
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8144
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 06:49:21PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
If you can come up with a proper use case, i.e. patch for a module,
then we can certainly talk about the exports. But without a user it
does not make any sense.
My module is currently out of the tree, so obviously it
On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 11:23:41PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
On 07/08/2015 08:40 PM, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
Hi,
The kthread park/unpark facility is not used in the kernel
kernel/smpboot.c ?
Got me, I should have said hardly used.
Sorry for the gross exageration
On Wed, 8 Jul 2015, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
The kthread park/unpark facility is not used in the kernel, so
git grep kthread.*park tells a different story
one would assume that it's made for kernel modules.
Certainly not.
This patch should definitely help most modules.
And how exactly
On Thu, 9 Jul 2015, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:05:02AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
This patch should definitely help most modules.
And how exactly would this help modules?
Putting kthread to sleep and waking them up later is slightly
tricky :
On 07/08/2015 08:40 PM, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The kthread park/unpark facility is not used in the kernel
kernel/smpboot.c ?
> , so one would assume that it's made for kernel modules. This patch should
> definitely help most modules.
> Patch untested, at your own
Hi,
The kthread park/unpark facility is not used in the kernel, so
one would assume that it's made for kernel modules. This patch should
definitely help most modules.
Patch untested, at your own risks...
Regards,
Jean
Signed-off-by: Jean Tourrilhes
diff
On 07/08/2015 08:40 PM, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
Hi,
The kthread park/unpark facility is not used in the kernel
kernel/smpboot.c ?
, so one would assume that it's made for kernel modules. This patch should
definitely help most modules.
Patch untested, at your own risks...
Hi,
The kthread park/unpark facility is not used in the kernel, so
one would assume that it's made for kernel modules. This patch should
definitely help most modules.
Patch untested, at your own risks...
Regards,
Jean
Signed-off-by: Jean Tourrilhes
14 matches
Mail list logo
