lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] work_on_cpu: Use our own workqueue.
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 23:05:37 +0100
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

>
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> > Well it turns out that I was having a less-than-usually-senile moment:
> >
> > : implement flush_work()
>
> > Why isn't that working in this case??
>
> how would that work in this case? We defer processing into the workqueue
> exactly because we want its per-CPU properties.

It detaches the work item, moves it to head-of-queue, reinserts it then
waits on it. I think.

This might have a race+hole. If a currently-running "unrelated"
work item tries to take the lock which the flush_work() caller is holding
then there's no way in which keventd will come back to execute
the work item which we just put on the head of queue.

> We want work_on_cpu() to
> be done in the workqueue context on the CPUs that were specified, not in
> the local CPU context.

flush_work() is supposed to work in the way which you describe.

But Oleg's "we may be running on a different CPU" comment has me all
confused.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-01-26 23:19    [W:0.109 / U:0.424 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site