[RFC] jffs2: use cond_resched() instead of yield()

[Wolfram Sang]

yield() has different semantics meanwhile and even causes RT-kernels to
BUG. Replace the only appearance left in jffs2.

Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
---

The aforementioned BUG() showed up in one of our customer's RT-projects. While
this could be handled by rearranging his thread-priorities, I wondered if such
a patch would be worthwhile, still. Reading through the material covering
yield() and related replacements, I believe this patch should be appropriate.
Please say if I missed some side-effects.

 fs/jffs2/erase.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/jffs2/erase.c b/fs/jffs2/erase.c
index abac961..e513f19 100644
--- a/fs/jffs2/erase.c
+++ b/fs/jffs2/erase.c
@@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ int jffs2_erase_pending_blocks(struct jffs2_sb_info *c, int count)
 		}
 
 		/* Be nice */
-		yield();
+		cond_resched();
 		mutex_lock(&c->erase_free_sem);
 		spin_lock(&c->erase_completion_lock);
 	}
-- 
1.7.1

--
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/