Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Cc:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
        Gregory Erwin <gregerwin256@gmail.com>,
        Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgense?= =?utf-8?Q?n?= 
        <toke@redhat.com>, Rui Salvaterra <rsalvaterra@gmail.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] ath9k: let sleep be interrupted when unregistering
 hwrng
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9q8-1vpV9zFsKkawk+XFm96S6fmug7v-NPJNpQmRoe6-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <Yrw5f8GN2fh2orid@zx2c4.com>
 <20220629114240.946411-1-Jason@zx2c4.com> <87v8s8ubws.fsf@kernel.org>
 <xhsmho7xv512f.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb>
 <CAHmME9q8-1vpV9zFsKkawk+XFm96S6fmug7v-NPJNpQmRoe6-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jul 2022 16:15:02 +0100
Message-ID: <xhsmhcze16snd.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On 11/07/22 13:53, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Hi Valentin,
>
> On 7/11/22, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Thanks for the Cc.
>>
>> I'm not hot on the export of wake_up_state(), IMO any wakeup with
>> !(state & TASK_NORMAL) should be reserved to kernel internals. Now, here
>> IIUC the problem is that the patch uses an inline invoking
>>
>>   wake_up_state(p, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
>>
>> so this isn't playing with any 'exotic' task state, thus it shouldn't
>> actually need the export.
>>
>> I've been trying to figure out if this could work with just a
>> wake_up_process(), but the sleeping pattern here is not very conforming
>> (cf. 'wait loop' pattern in sched/core.c), AFAICT the signal is used to
>> circumvent that :/
>
> I don't intend to work on this patch more. If you'd like to ack the
> trivial scheduler change (adding EXPORT_SYMBOL), that'd help, and then
> this can move forward as planned. Otherwise, if you have particular
> opinions about this patch that you want to happen, feel free to pick
> up the patch and send your own revisions (though I don't intend to do
> further review). Alternatively, I'll just send a patch to remove the
> driver entirely. Hopefully you do find this ack-able, though.
>

I'm not for a blanket wake_up_state() export, however if we *really* need
it then I suppose we could have a wake_up_process_interruptible() exported
and used by __set_notify_signal().