On 31/03/18 10:28, Andrei Vagin wrote: > In "autofs4: use wait_event_killable", wait_event_interruptible() was > replaced by wait_event_killable(), but in this case we have to use > wake_up() instead of wake_up_interruptible().
Why do you believe wake_up() is needed rather than wake_up_interruptible()? Now that I'm thinking about the wake up I'm wondering if this is in fact what's needed. Rather, I think maybe wake_up_all() is probably the only one that will actually do what's needed. There's an individual wait queue for each mount, there can be multiple waiters for a mount, they all should be woken up when the daemon signals mount completion. > > Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawil...@microsoft.com> > Cc: Ian Kent <ra...@themaw.net> > Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> > Cc: Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au> > Signed-off-by: Andrei Vagin <ava...@openvz.org> > --- > fs/autofs4/waitq.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c b/fs/autofs4/waitq.c > index c160e9b3aa0f..be9c3dc048ab 100644 > --- a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c > +++ b/fs/autofs4/waitq.c > @@ -549,7 +549,7 @@ int autofs4_wait_release(struct autofs_sb_info *sbi, > autofs_wqt_t wait_queue_tok > kfree(wq->name.name); > wq->name.name = NULL; /* Do not wait on this queue */ > wq->status = status; > - wake_up_interruptible(&wq->queue); > + wake_up(&wq->queue); > if (!--wq->wait_ctr) > kfree(wq); > mutex_unlock(&sbi->wq_mutex); >
