[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] fix-flush_workqueue-vs-cpu_dead-race-update
    On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 08:06:35PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
    > Ah, missed you point, thanks. Yet another old problem which was not introduced
    > by recent changes. And yet another indication we should avoid kthread_stop()
    > on CPU_DEAD event :) I believe this is easy to fix, but need to think more.

    I think the problem is not just with CPU_DEAD. Anyone who calls
    cleanup_workqueue_thread (say destroy_workqueue?) will see this race.

    Do you see any problems if cleanup_workqueue_thread is changed as:

    cwq->thread = NULL;

    > run_workqueue:
    > while (!list_empty(&cwq->worklist)) {
    > ...
    > // We hold lock_cpu_hotplug(), cpu event can't make
    > // progress.
    > ...
    > }

    Ok ..yes a cpu_event_waits_for_lock() helper will help here.

    > > I agree it minimizes the interactions. Maybe worth attempting. However I
    > > suspect it may not be as simple as it appears :)
    > Yes, that is why this patch only does the first step: flush_workqueue() checks
    > the dead CPUs as well, this change is minimal.
    > Do you see any problems this patch adds?

    I dont see as of now. I suspect we will know better when we implement
    the patch to eliminate CPU_DEAD handling in workqueue.c

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-01-09 06:07    [W:0.053 / U:17.804 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site