On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 09:44:11AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Dean Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 01:11:15PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok.Because of the module unloading issue, and because we don't have
> >> a lot of these threads running a
Dean Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 10:22:30AM -0500, Dean Nelson wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 02:33:32PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> > Dean Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > > Taking it one step further, if you added the notion of a thread poo
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 10:22:30AM -0500, Dean Nelson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 02:33:32PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > Dean Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Taking it one step further, if you added the notion of a thread pool,
> > > where upon exit, a thread isn't destro
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 02:33:32PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Dean Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 12:34:02PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Dean Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> >
> >> > XPC is in need of threads that can block indefinitely, wh
Dean Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 12:34:02PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Dean Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > Christoph is correct in that XPC has a single thread that exists throughout
>> > its lifetime, another set of threads that exist for the
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 12:34:02PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Dean Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Christoph is correct in that XPC has a single thread that exists throughout
> > its lifetime, another set of threads that exist for the time that active
> > contact with other XPCs r
Dean Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Christoph is correct in that XPC has a single thread that exists throughout
> its lifetime, another set of threads that exist for the time that active
> contact with other XPCs running on other SGI system partitions exists, and
> finally there is a pool o
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 04:51:03PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Another driver which should be fully converted to the kthread API:
> kthread_stop() and kthread_should_stop().
>
> And according to my logs, this driver was added to the tree more than
> a year _after_ the kthread interface was made
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 01:58:44AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> From: Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> This patch starts the xpc kernel threads using kthread_run
> not a combination of kernel_thread and daemonize. Resuling
> in slightly simpler and more maintainable code.
>
> Cc: J
Jes Sorensen wrote:
>
> Russ/Dean/Robin - could one of you provide some feedback to this one
> please.
Dean's on vacation for a couple days and will test it when he gets back.
--
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubsc
Jes Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Like with the previous patch from Eric, I'm CC'ing the correct people
> for this patch (forwarded it in a seperate email). CC'ing irrelevant
> lists such as containers@ and not linux-ia64@ makes it somewhat
> difficult to get proper reviews of these thi
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 01:58:44AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
From: Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This patch starts the xpc kernel threads using kthread_run
not a combination of kernel_thread and daemonize. Resuling
in slightly simpler and more maintainabl
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 01:58:44AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> From: Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> This patch starts the xpc kernel threads using kthread_run
> not a combination of kernel_thread and daemonize. Resuling
> in slightly simpler and more maintainable code.
This driv
Robin Holt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think this was originally coded with daemonize to avoid issues with
> reaping children. Dean Nelson can correct me if I am wrong. I assume
> this patch is going in as part of the set which will make these threads
> clear themselves from the children lis
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 08:23:39AM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >Another driver which should be fully converted to the kthread API:
> >kthread_stop() and kthread_should_stop().
> >
> >And according to my logs, this driver was added to the tree more than
> >a year _after_ the
Andrew Morton wrote:
Another driver which should be fully converted to the kthread API:
kthread_stop() and kthread_should_stop().
And according to my logs, this driver was added to the tree more than
a year _after_ the kthread interface was made available.
This isn't good.
Andrew,
Per my pre
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 01:58:44 -0600
"Eric W. Biederman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This patch starts the xpc kernel threads using kthread_run
> not a combination of kernel_thread and daemonize. Resuling
> in slightly simpler and more maintainable code.
>
> Cc: Jes Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Russ, Robin,
Any objections to this patch?
Eric, please send such patches to the appropriate list, it's in ia64
file after all.
Thanks,
Jes
--- Begin Message ---
From: Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This patch starts the xpc kernel threads using kthread_run
not a combination of kernel_
From: Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This patch starts the xpc kernel threads using kthread_run
not a combination of kernel_thread and daemonize. Resuling
in slightly simpler and more maintainable code.
Cc: Jes Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Tony Luck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by:
From: Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - unquoted
This patch starts the xpc kernel threads using kthread_run
not a combination of kernel_thread and daemonize. Resuling
in slightly simpler and more maintainable code.
Cc: Jes Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Tony Luck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sign
20 matches
Mail list logo
