Re: wait_event_interruptible() seems non-atomic

[Manfred Spraul]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

> > For example the use of down_interruptible() looks wrong to me, I'd use
> > plain down().
> >    
>
> I'd like to be able to hit Ctrl+C (in the userspace application) whenever
> possible. If that's not a reason, blame the book
> http://www.xml.com/ldd/chapter/book/ch03.html#t8 ("the read method" a further
> down below)
>
>  
As far as I can see BufferLock is only held for tiny sections - the 
longest thing is a copy_to_user(), i.e. at worst a swap in. I my opinion 
the delay for handling Ctrl+C is therefore negligible and not worth the 
added code for handling down_interruptible().
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.

--
   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/