Messages in this thread | | | From | qianli zhao <> | Date | Tue, 25 Aug 2020 16:55:52 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] workqueue: Warn when work flush own workqueue |
| |
Markus
Thanks for your suggestion,and sorry for my poor wording.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 4:00 PM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de> wrote: > > > Flushing own workqueue or work self in work context will lead to > > a deadlock. > > I imagine that the wording “or work self” can become clearer another bit. > > > > Catch this incorrect usage and issue a warning when issue happened > > * Would you like to mark the end of such a sentence with a dot? > > * How do you think about to adjust the repetition of the word “issue”?
How about below changelog?
workqueue: Warn when work flush own workqueue
Flushing itself or own workqueue in work context will lead to a deadlock. Catch this incorrect usage and warning when issue happened.
> > > … > > - update comment > > --- > > kernel/workqueue.c | 10 +++++++--- > > I suggest to replace these triple dashes by a blank line. Ok > > > … > > @@ -2585,6 +2585,7 @@ static int rescuer_thread(void *__rescuer) > > * @target_work: work item being flushed (NULL for workqueue flushes) > > * > > * %current is trying to flush the whole @target_wq or @target_work on it. > > + * If a work flushing own workqueue or itself will lead to a deadlock. > > I stumble on understanding challenges for the wording “work flushing”. > Can an adjustment help in comparison to the term “work item”?
How about below comment?
* If a work item flushing own workqueue or itself will lead to a deadlock.
> > Regards, > Markus
| |