On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Eddie Wai <eddie....@broadcom.com> wrote:
> +/**
> + * bnx2i_percpu_io_thread - thread per cpu for ios
> + *
> + * @arg: ptr to bnx2i_percpu_info structure
> + */
> +int bnx2i_percpu_io_thread(void *arg)
> +{
> + struct bnx2i_percpu_s *p = arg;
> + struct bnx2i_work *work, *tmp;
> + LIST_HEAD(work_list);
> +
> + set_user_nice(current, -20);
> +
> + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> + while (!kthread_should_stop()) {
> + schedule();
> + spin_lock_bh(&p->p_work_lock);
> + while (!list_empty(&p->work_list)) {
> + list_splice_init(&p->work_list, &work_list);
> + spin_unlock_bh(&p->p_work_lock);
> +
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(work, tmp, &work_list, list)
> {
> + list_del_init(&work->list);
> + /* work allocated in the bh, freed here */
> + bnx2i_process_scsi_cmd_resp(work->session,
> + work->bnx2i_conn,
> + &work->cqe);
> + atomic_dec(&work->bnx2i_conn->work_cnt);
> + kfree(work);
> + }
> + spin_lock_bh(&p->p_work_lock);
> + }
> + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> + spin_unlock_bh(&p->p_work_lock);
> + }
> + __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
This loop looks a little strange to me. If the schedule() call would
be moved from the top of the outermost while loop to the bottom then
the first set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE) statement can be
eliminated. And that also fixes the (theoretical?) race that occurs if
wake_up_process() gets invoked after kthread_create() but before the
first set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE) statement got executed.
Fubo.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"open-iscsi" group.
To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
open-iscsi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi?hl=en.
