On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:08:58 +0530 Shani Moideen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, > > Replacing current->state with set_current_state in kernel/signal.c > > @@ -2596,7 +2596,7 @@ sys_signal(int sig, __sighandler_t handler) > asmlinkage long > sys_pause(void) > { > - current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; > + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); > schedule(); Hi Shani Either you think you corrected a BUG, so please state it clearly in Changelog so that Linus immediatly apply your patch for 2.6.21 :) Either you dont know the exact semantic of set_current_state() and think it's a cleaner way to set current->state. It might looks better for you but it's not the *same* thing. I suggest you carefully study the difference between set_current_state() and __set_current_state(), and submit a new patch, once you feel comfortable with it. Here is the relevant extract from include/linux/sched.h /* * set_current_state() includes a barrier so that the write of current->state * is correctly serialised wrt the caller's subsequent test of whether to * actually sleep: * * set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); * if (do_i_need_to_sleep()) * schedule(); * * If the caller does not need such serialisation then use __set_current_state() */ #define __set_current_state(state_value) \ do { current->state = (state_value); } while (0) #define set_current_state(state_value) \ set_mb(current->state, (state_value)) Thank you - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/