[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DDFD17CC94A9BD49A82147DDF7D545C501CFAFCD@exchange.ZeugmaSystems.local>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:52:39 -0700
From: "Anirban Sinha" <ASinha@...gmasystems.com>
To: "Oleg Nesterov" <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: FW: avoiding run_workqueue() recursion
Hi Oleg:
>If we just return silently, we do not flush but hide the problem ?
>And in this can lead to other problems which are very hard to
>trigger/debug.
True. I think flushing is an invalid operation for a thread that is
already walking the work-queue, like keventd. It is inherently bug in
the code somewhere else (may be in a work function?). I liked your idea
of replacing WARN_ON() with BUG_ON() but I do understand that a panic
could be a bigger hammer here. May be we can have some sort of
restrictions or conventions for writing work functions? I don't know.
Ani
--
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