linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/19] stop_machine: reimplement without using workqueue

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4ACBD5D1.9020607@kernel.org>
Date:	Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:42:09 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
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

Rusty Russell wrote:
> 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 :(

Yeap, played with it and seems to work fine.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/