Re: [PATCH 3/5] coredump: cleanup the waiting for coredump_finishcode

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 02/14, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
>
> Replace the for loop with a simple if.

Why?

> --- a/kernel/exit.c
> +++ b/kernel/exit.c
> @@ -479,12 +479,9 @@ static void exit_mm(struct task_struct * tsk)
>  		if (atomic_dec_and_test(&core_state->nr_threads))
>  			complete(&core_state->startup);
>
> -		for (;;) {
> -			set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> -			if (!self.task) /* see coredump_finish() */
> -				break;
> +		set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> +		if (self.task) /* see coredump_finish() */
>  			schedule();
> -		}

If you think we should not worry about spurious wakeups you can simplify
this code even more, you do not need mb() to set TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE
(just move it before dec_and_test), you do not need "if (self.task)",
you do not need __set_task_state(tsk, TASK_RUNNING).

But I think we should always worry, so why?

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/