Messages in this thread | | | From | "Fabio M. De Francesco" <> | Subject | Re: [syzbot] possible deadlock in worker_thread | Date | Thu, 17 Feb 2022 13:27:08 +0100 |
| |
On lunedì 14 febbraio 2022 04:44:25 CET Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 10:08:00AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > + destroy_workqueue(srp_tl_err_wq); > > > > Then, we can call WARN_ON() if e.g. flush_workqueue() is called on system-wide workqueues. > > Yeah, this is the right thing to do. It makes no sense at all to call > flush_workqueue() on the shared workqueues as the caller has no idea what > it's gonna end up waiting for. It was on my todo list a long while ago but > slipped through the crack. If anyone wanna take a stab at it (including > scrubbing the existing users, of course), please be my guest. >
Just to think and understand... what if the system-wide WQ were allocated as unbound ordered (i.e., as in alloc_ordered_workqueue()) with "max_active" of one?
1) Would it solve the locks dependency problem? 2) Would it introduce performance penalties (bottlenecks)?
Greetings,
Fabio
> > Thanks. > > -- > tejun >
| |