From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait) implementation
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 16:29:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150114152902.GH22386@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150114100102.55c78715@gandalf.local.home>
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:01:02AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Then why even bother with the wake_up_state, and not just call
> wake_up_process()?
Ah indeed. TASK_NORMAL should be fine for all.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-14 15:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-18 0:22 [PATCH v2 0/7] simple wait queue support (from -rt) Paul Gortmaker
2014-10-18 0:22 ` [PATCH 1/7] wait.h: mark complex wait functions to prepare for simple wait Paul Gortmaker
2014-10-18 0:22 ` [PATCH 2/7] wait.c: " Paul Gortmaker
2014-10-18 0:22 ` [PATCH 3/7] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait) implementation Paul Gortmaker
2014-10-18 21:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-18 23:05 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-10-20 15:21 ` Paul Gortmaker
2014-10-20 15:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-10-20 16:05 ` Paul Gortmaker
2014-10-20 16:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-10-20 13:44 ` Paul Gortmaker
2015-01-14 10:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-01-14 14:18 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-01-14 14:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-01-14 15:01 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-01-14 15:29 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-10-18 0:22 ` [PATCH 4/7] sched/completion: convert completions to use simple wait queues Paul Gortmaker
2014-10-18 0:23 ` [PATCH 5/7] rcu: use simple wait queues where possible in rcutree Paul Gortmaker
2014-10-18 0:23 ` [PATCH 6/7] simplewait: don't run a possibly infinite number of wake under raw lock Paul Gortmaker
2014-10-18 0:23 ` [PATCH 7/7] simplewait: do we make barriers reflect what was in use in -rt? Paul Gortmaker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150114152902.GH22386@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).