Re: Suggest TASK_KILLABLE state to overcome most D state trouble

David Woodhouse (dwmw2@infradead.org)
Thu, 27 Sep 2001 22:00:50 +0100

bulb@ucw.cz said:
> Does a patch adding a TASK_KILLABLE state have a chance to get in (in
> 2.5)? Or can anybody thik of more elegant solution?

Often there's kernel state which needs to be kept consistent, and locks
which need to be released - just bailing out (as if you got an oops) isn't
sufficient.

What's wrong with the plan of just implementing the appropriate cleanup code
in each buggy or lazy piece of code which sleeps in state
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, and letting each be interruptible instead?

--
dwmw2




-
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/