linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	<mingo@redhat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 21:56:05 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312302149350.1457-100000@bigblue.dev.mdolabs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031231053603.65CA52C08B@lists.samba.org>

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Rusty Russell wrote:

> In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312302100550.1457-100000@bigblue.dev.mdolabs.com> you write:
> > Wouldn't it be better to put a kt_message inside a tast_struct?
> 
> Expand task_struct for this one usage?  I don't think that's
> worthwhile.
> 
> The whole code is written so there is no datastructure associated with
> the kthread.  When something like kt_message is needed (to kill a
> thread, for example), they grab the lock and use the static one.
> 
> This means that threads can exit without having to do cleanup.

I agree on one side, there's the drawback on a size increase (3 pointers, 
plus eventually a spinlock) of the task struct. But IMO the code would be 
cleaner, since you know who is the target of the message. Also it would 
not require any cleanup since there would be nothing allocated, just a 
struct member inside task_struct.
Also, what happens in the task woke up by a send does not reschedule 
before another CPU does another send? Wouldn't a message be lost?



- Davide



  reply	other threads:[~2003-12-31  5:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-12-31  3:31 [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create Rusty Russell
2003-12-31  4:33 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-12-31  5:28   ` Rusty Russell
2003-12-31  6:34     ` Jeff Garzik
2003-12-31  8:47       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-01-01 23:51       ` Rusty Russell
2003-12-31  4:49 ` Andrew Morton
2003-12-31  5:18   ` Rusty Russell
2003-12-31  5:06 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-12-31  5:34   ` Rusty Russell
2003-12-31  5:56     ` Davide Libenzi [this message]
2003-12-31  6:27       ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-01  3:45         ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-02  7:09           ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-02 16:58             ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-03  3:05               ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-03  3:43                 ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-03 11:47                   ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-04  4:23                     ` Davide Libenzi
2004-03-29 15:42                     ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-03 19:00                   ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-03 23:53                     ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-04  2:34                     ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-04  4:42                       ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-04  4:55                         ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-04  9:35                         ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-04 23:03                           ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-05  4:09                             ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-05  5:06                               ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-05  6:38                                 ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-05  6:52                                   ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-07  7:00                                     ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-07  7:25                                       ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-08  0:33                                         ` Rusty Russell
2004-03-29 15:42                         ` Davide Libenzi
2004-03-29 15:42                       ` Davide Libenzi
2004-03-29 15:41                     ` Davide Libenzi
2004-03-29 15:42                     ` Rusty Russell
2004-03-29 15:40                   ` Davide Libenzi
2004-03-29 15:41                   ` Rusty Russell
2004-03-29 15:39                 ` Davide Libenzi
2004-03-29 15:39               ` Rusty Russell
2004-03-29 15:38             ` Davide Libenzi
2003-12-31  6:31       ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2003-12-31  7:12         ` Davide Libenzi
2003-12-31 23:25           ` Rusty Russell
2003-12-31 18:02 Albert Cahalan

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=Pine.LNX.4.44.0312302149350.1457-100000@bigblue.dev.mdolabs.com \
    --to=davidel@xmailserver.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /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).