lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 memstick: support for legacy sony memsticks
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 09:34:39PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> But this just adds the WQ_UNBOUND. Dunno, without lock I had several
> crashes, that for high level of confidence caused by by parallel
> execution of work items. Once I added this mutex, I couldnt reproduce
> these.

Yes the combination of WQ_UNBOUND and max_active==1 guarantees
strictly ordered one-by-one execution.

> I had the __blk_end_request fail with NULL msb->req. I can't see how
> that can happen if work queue isn't executed in parallel.
> (and then the I didn't even had by mistake the code that sets it to NULL
> in msb_stop, so I really fail to see how that could happen due internal
> bug in my code.

If you're seeing parallel execution w/ ordered workqueue, it is a
critical bug which would make the kernel crash left and right. Please
try alloc_ordered_workqueue() and if you still see parallel execution,
please report.

Thanks.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-25 22:21    [W:0.048 / U:0.340 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site