[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070220151220.GB4960@in.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 20:42:20 +0530
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>, akpm@...l.org,
paulmck@...ibm.com, mingo@...e.hu, dipankar@...ibm.com,
venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rjw@...k.pl
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH(Experimental) 2/4] Revert changes to workqueue.c
On Sun, Feb 18, 2007 at 12:59:28AM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Before you begin. You are doing CPU_DOWN_PREPARE after freeze_processes().
> Not good. This makes impossible to do flush_workueue() at CPU_DOWN_PREPARE
> stage, we have callers.
We have few solutions to deal with this:
a. Mark such workqueues not freezable for hotplug
b. If above is not possible, don't call flush_workqueue in DOWN_PREPARE
c. If above is not possible, send DOWN_PREPARE before freeze_processes()
I would prefer a solution in the above order listed.
Which caller are you referring to here? Maybe we can decide on the
option after we see the users of flush_workqueue() in DOWN_PREPARE.
> I'm afraid it won't be so easy to solve all locking/racing problems. Will
> wait for the patch :)
I dont see problems for workqueue.c even if we follow option c. Do you
see any?
--
Regards,
vatsa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists