[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200910062006.59755.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 20:06:58 +1030
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: jeff@...zik.org, mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
cl@...ux-foundation.org, dhowells@...hat.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/19] stop_machine: reimplement without using workqueue
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 05:39:06 pm Tejun Heo wrote:
> stop_machine() is the only user of RT workqueue. Reimplement it using
> kthreads directly and rip RT support from workqueue. This is in
> preparation of concurrency managed workqueue.
Seems reasonable, but:
> void stop_machine_destroy(void)
> {
> + get_online_cpus();
> mutex_lock(&setup_lock);
Did you test hotplug cpu after this change? Maybe this works fine, but it's
always the one we break when we play with this code :(
Thanks!
Rusty.
--
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