[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120712170618.GB20167@google.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 10:06:18 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
joshhunt00@...il.com, axboe@...nel.dk, rni@...gle.com,
vgoyal@...hat.com, vwadekar@...dia.com,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, swhiteho@...hat.com, bpm@....com,
elder@...nel.org, xfs@....sgi.com, marcel@...tmann.org,
gustavo@...ovan.org, johan.hedberg@...il.com,
linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, martin.petersen@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] workqueue: use @pool instead of @gcwq or @cpu
where applicable
Hello, Tony.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 04:30:36PM -0700, Tony Luck wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> > @@ -1234,7 +1235,7 @@ static void worker_enter_idle(struct worker *worker)
> > */
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(gcwq->trustee_state == TRUSTEE_DONE &&
> > pool->nr_workers == pool->nr_idle &&
> > - atomic_read(get_gcwq_nr_running(gcwq->cpu)));
> > + atomic_read(get_pool_nr_running(pool)));
> > }
>
> Just had this WARN_ON_ONCE trigger on ia64 booting next-20120710. I
> haven't bisected ... just noticed that two patches in this series tinker
> with lines in this check. next-20120706 didn't generate the WARN.
Sorry about the delay. The warning is spurious. As now there are
multiple pools, nr_running check should be done before
pool->nr_workers check. Will post fix soon.
Thank you.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists