On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:09:11 -0800 (PST), Christoph Lameter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, Jason Uhlenkott wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 05:36:50PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > + while (avenrun[0] >= ((unsigned long)sysctl_scrub_load <<
> > > FSHIFT)) {
> > > + set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> > > + schedule_timeout(30*HZ);
> > > + }
> >
> > This should probably be TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE. It'll never actually get
> > interrupted either way since kernel threads block all signals, but
> > sleeping uninterruptibly contributes to the load average.
>
> Correct. .... I just do not seem to be able to get this right.
I think msleep_interruptible(30000) would be your best choice, then.
Maybe with a comment that you don't actually expect signals, but are
using TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE to avoid contributing to load average (that
way, if the loadavg calculation changes someday, somebody will be able
to change your sleep over appropriately).
Thanks,
Nish
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
