Re: [PATCH 0/7 v2 RFC] Make wake_up_{bit,var} less fragile

[NeilBrown]

Hi Ingo and Peter,
 have you had a chance to look at these yet?  Should I resend?  Maybe
 after -rc is out?

Thanks,
NeilBrown


On Mon, 26 Aug 2024, NeilBrown wrote:
> This is a second attempt to make wake_up_{bit,var} less fragile.
> This version doesn't change those functions much, but instead
> improves the documentation and provides some helpers which
> both serve as patterns to follow and alternates so that use of the
> fragile functions can be limited or eliminated.
> 
> The only change to either function is that wake_up_bit() is changed to
> take an unsigned long * rather than a void *.  This necessitates the
> first patch which changes the one place where something other then
> unsigned long * is passed to wake_up bit - it is in block/.
> 
> The final patch modifies the same bit of code as a demonstration of one
> of the new APIs that has been added.
> 
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
> 
> 
>  [PATCH 1/7] block: change wait on bd_claiming to use a var_waitqueue,
>  [PATCH 2/7] sched: change wake_up_bit() and related function to
>  [PATCH 3/7] sched: Improve documentation for wake_up_bit/wait_on_bit
>  [PATCH 4/7] sched: Document wait_var_event() family of functions and
>  [PATCH 5/7] sched: Add test_and_clear_wake_up_bit() and
>  [PATCH 6/7] sched: Add wait/wake interface for variable updated under
>  [PATCH 7/7] Block: switch bd_prepare_to_claim to use
> 
>