Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 04 Jan 2002 15:21:55 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: hashed waitqueues |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote: > > > + /* > > + * Although the default semantics of wake_up() are > > + * to wake all, here the specific function is used > > + * to make it even more explicit that a number of > > + * pages are being waited on here. > > + */ > > + if(waitqueue_active(page_waitqueue(page))) > > + wake_up_all(page_waitqueue(page)); > ... > > Also, why wake_up_all()? That will wake all tasks which are sleeping > in __lock_page(), even though they've asked for exclusive wakeup > semantics. Will a bare wake_up() here not suffice? >
Doh. It helps to read the comment. Suggest that __lock_page() be changed to use add_wait_queue().
- - 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/
| |