Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755519AbZF3TXa (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:23:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752804AbZF3TXV (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:23:21 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:43371 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751818AbZF3TXV (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:23:21 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Roland McGrath To: Oleg Nesterov Cc: Ratan Nalumasu , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , Vitaly Mayatskikh , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH 2/2] change __wake_up_parent() to use filtered wakeup In-Reply-To: Oleg Nesterov's message of Monday, 29 June 2009 05:38:52 +0200 <20090629033852.GA14404@redhat.com> References: <20090622170437.GA4906@redhat.com> <20090624091316.73D0F4059B@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090624152143.GB23848@redhat.com> <20090624185701.AA74C4059B@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090624161111.GA27890@redhat.com> <20090624194239.A29174059B@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090624171357.GA30435@redhat.com> <20090624205112.3EA944059B@magilla.sf.frob.com> <93ad5f3f0906252111n48742b9ax8dc2ad35b30f4292@mail.gmail.com> <20090629033852.GA14404@redhat.com> X-Zippy-Says: Look into my eyes and try to forget that you have a Macy's charge card! Message-Id: <20090630192235.90AFB1C4@magilla.sf.frob.com> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:22:35 -0700 (PDT) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 945 Lines: 28 > > if ((wo->wo_flags & __WNOTHREAD) && wo->child_wait.private != > > p->parent) > > return 0; > > === > > > > I will run it on my test machines and see if everything looks good. > > OK, thanks. > > The only problem it uses ->parent, this conflicts with other out-of-tree > ptrace changes... > > Roland, do you think we should do this change now or later? I think it makes most sense to put that in right after the initial wait_child_callback patch (if not rolled into it). In fact, the original approach was to do just this "simplest" __WNOTHREAD-checking callback first, and add the eligible_child() hacking second (not that I think that order matters). Thanks, Roland -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/