On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:19:24 -0400 Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> wrote:Using signals to communicate with kernel threads is fairly unpleasant, IMO. We have much simpler, faster and more idiomatic ways of communicating between threads in-kernel and there are better ways in which userspace can communicate with the kernel - system calls, for example... So I think generally any move which gets us away from using signals in kernel threads is moving in a good direction. Where's the hang? A user process is stuck on h_rwsem? If so, would it be appropriate to convert the user process to use down_foo_interruptible(), so that the operator can just kill the user process as expected, rather than having to futz around killing kernel threads? -
| Alan Cox | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 007/196] Chinese: add translation of stable_kernel_rules.txt |
| Eric W. Biederman | Re: [net-2.6.24][patch 2/2] Dynamically allocate the loopback device |
| Rafael J. Wysocki | Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
