Inconsistency in changing the state of task ??

From: prash_t@softhome.net
Date: Tue Mar 04 2003 - 03:36:20 EST

Next message: Niels den Otter: "Re: IGMP problem with 2.5 kernels"
Previous message: mika.penttila@kolumbus.fi: "Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: get initialization ordering right [Was: [PATCH 2.5] : i82365 & platform_bus_type]"
Next in thread: Robert Love: "Re: Inconsistency in changing the state of task ??"
Reply: Robert Love: "Re: Inconsistency in changing the state of task ??"
Maybe reply: Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky: "RE: Inconsistency in changing the state of task ??"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi,
while browsing through fs/select.c file of 2.4.19, I came across two
DIFFERENT ways of changing the state of the current task in do_select():

set_current_state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
AND current->state = TASK_RUNNING;

I am curious to know if the second line of code doesn't cause any problem in
SMP systems. I also see the same situation in do_poll().

Please cc to my id since I am not subscribed to the mailing list.

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

Next message: Niels den Otter: "Re: IGMP problem with 2.5 kernels"
Previous message: mika.penttila@kolumbus.fi: "Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: get initialization ordering right [Was: [PATCH 2.5] : i82365 & platform_bus_type]"
Next in thread: Robert Love: "Re: Inconsistency in changing the state of task ??"
Reply: Robert Love: "Re: Inconsistency in changing the state of task ??"
Maybe reply: Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky: "RE: Inconsistency in changing the state of task ??"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 07 2003 - 22:00:24 EST