lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: UMH_WAIT_EXEC->UMH_WAIT_PROC deadlock
forgot to mention...

On 05/21, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Another issue is that Tejun dislikes the usage of system_unbound_wq.
> I guess, because WQ_UNBOUND implies WQ_HIGHPRI. Btw, I do not really
> understand why. And, otoh, I don't think that __call_usermodehelper()
> should be bound to any CPU, this would look a bit strange to me.

and please note that currently khelper_wq is WQ_UNBOUND anyway.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-05-21 21:01    [W:0.120 / U:0.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site