Re: wait_event_interruptible() seems non-atomic

[Manfred Spraul]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

> > You have already written the code, so I'd leave it as it is and I'll
> > blame the book. They probably started from an older version of
> > fs/pipe.c, which contained _interruptible calls. There are gone now,
> > this allowed some cleanup.
> >    
>
> Well, it's just one line so I would not care, and I'm also open for
> suggestions. Does down_interruptible() cost so much more in CPU cycles than
> down()?
>
>  
It's more about code complexity than performance. down_interruptible() 
means that you must handle failures - double check that you free all 
temporary allocations, decrease all reference counts (make the reference 
counts atomic_t), etc.

--
   Manfred
-
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/