Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 May 2012 20:12:44 +0200 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: 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.
| |