[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080729134456.GA355@tv-sign.ru>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:44:57 +0400
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [patch, minor] workqueue: consistently use 'err' in __create_workqueue_key()
On 07/29, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 07/29, Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
> >
> > And I'd say this behavior (of having a partially-created object
> > visible to the outside world) is not that robust. e.g. the
> > aforementioned race would be eliminated if we place a wq on the global
> > list only when it's been successfully initialized.
>
> Yes, we can change __create_workqueue_key() to check err == 0 before
> list_add(),
Well no, we can't do even this.
Then we have another race with cpu-hotplug. Suppose we have CPUs 0, 1, 2.
create_workqueue() fails to create cwq->thread for CPU 2 and calls
destroy_workqueue(). Before it takes the cpu_add_remove_lock, _cpu_down()
removes CPU 1 from cpu_populated_map, but since we didn't add this wq
on the global list, cwq[1]->thread remains alive.
destroy_workqueue() takes cpu_add_remove_lock, and calls
cleanup_workqueue_thread() for CPUs 0 and 2. cwq[1]->thread is lost.
Damn. I had this in mind when I wrote the code, but forgot. We need
comments, I'll send the patch.
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