Hi Boqun,
On 10/26/2015 01:04 PM, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 09:28:07AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * The thing about the wake_up_state() return value; I think we can ignore
>> it.
>> + *
>> + * If for some reason it would return 0, that means the previously waiting
>> + * task is already running, so it will observe condition true (or has
>> already).
>> + */
>> +void swake_up_locked(struct swait_queue_head *q)
>> +{
>> + struct swait_queue *curr;
>> +
>> + list_for_each_entry(curr, &q->task_list, task_list) {
>> + wake_up_process(curr->task);
>> + list_del_init(&curr->task_list);
>> + break;
>
> Just be curious, what's this break for? Or what's this loop(?) for?
I have to guess here, since Peter wrote it. It looks like the function
is based on __wake_up_common(). Though I agree the loop is not necessary
and something like below should the trick. Unless I do not see something
important.
void swake_up_locked(struct swait_queue_head *q)
{
struct swait_queue *curr;
if (list_emtpy(&q))
return;
curr = list_first_entry(&q, typeof(*curr), task_list);
wake_up_process(curr->task);
list_del_init(&curr->task_list);
}
If Peter is not complaining I change swake_up_locked() for the next version.
Thanks,
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
