Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: Add comment explaining task state setting inbdi_forker_thread()

[Jan Kara]

On Mon 05-09-11 20:44:11, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 06:01:41PM +0800, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Sun 04-09-11 11:05:51, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > > @@ -401,6 +401,13 @@ static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
> > > >  		}
> > > >  
> > > >  		spin_lock_bh(&bdi_lock);
> > > > +		/*
> > > > +		 * In the following loop we are going to check whether we have
> > > > +		 * some work to do without any synchronization with tasks
> > > > +		 * waking us up to do work for them. So we have to set task
> > > > +		 * state already here so that we don't miss wakeups coming
> > > 
> > > s/already/early/ ?
> >   Thanks for review. We'd have to substitute 'already here' with 'early'
> > for the sentence to make make sense. But frankly I don't see why one would
> > be better than the other one...
> 
> You are the native English speaker?  OK, I have no more problems... ;)
  No, I'm not a native English speaker. Maybe that's why I don't see that
much difference :-))

									Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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/