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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:03:17 +0100
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeff@...zik.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, avi@...hat.com,
	peterz@...radead.org, andi@...stfloor.org, fweisbec@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/21] workqueue: simple reimplementation of
 SINGLE_THREAD workqueue

On Tue, 2009-11-17 at 02:15 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> SINGLE_THREAD workqueues are used to reduce the number of worker
> threads and ease synchronization.

Wireless (mac80211) also requires that the order in which different work
structs are queued up is identical to the processing order. At least
some code was written with that assumption in mind, and I think it's
actually required in a few places.

Also, that unlikely() here:

> +	if (unlikely(single_thread)) {
> +		mutex_lock(&wq->single_thread_mutex);
> +		f(work);
> +		mutex_unlock(&wq->single_thread_mutex);
> +	} else
> +		f(work);

seems wrong, there are many single-threaded workqueues after all.

johannes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ