[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070513212548.GA3185@tv-sign.ru>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 01:25:48 +0400
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Gautham Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable
Hi Tejun,
Sorry, I can't give a "complete" reply today (will do tomorrow),
just one note right now...
On 05/13, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >> * try_to_grab_pending() checks VALID && pointers equal after grabbing
> >> cwq->lock.
> >
> > We don't even need to check the pointers. VALID bit is always changed
> > under cwq->lock. So, if we see VALID under cwq->lock, we have a right
> > pointer.
>
> But there are multiple cwq->lock's. VALID can be set with one of other
> cwq->lock's locked.
Oops. Thanks for correcting me. _This_ was a reson for a stupid barrier!
Oleg.
-
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