lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/7 V6] workqueue: fix idle worker depletion
On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 02:07:50AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> when we release gcwq->lock and then grab it, we leave a hole that things
> can be changed.
>
> I don't want to open a hole. if the hole has bug we have to fix it.
> if the hole has no bug, we have to add lot of comments to explain it.
>
> When I write this reply. I am thinking: is the hole has bug if
> I release gcwq->lock here? result: no. But I don't want to add all things
> what I have thought as comments to explain there is no bug even when we
> open a hole. don't leave reviewers too much burden.

We're already releasing gcwq->lock in maybe_create_worker(). That's
the reason why @ret is set to true. In addition, we already released
the lock to grab manager_mutex. So, you're not adding any burden.
Please reuse the busy rebinding mechanism.

Thanks.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-08 20:21    [W:0.054 / U:0.520 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site