linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHSET wq/for-3.10-tmp] workqueue: implement workqueue with custom worker attributes

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:	Mon, 11 Mar 2013 23:40:28 +0800
From:	Lai Jiangshan <eag0628@...il.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	axboe@...nel.dk, jmoyer@...hat.com, zab@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET wq/for-3.10-tmp] workqueue: implement workqueue with
 custom worker attributes

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 05:01:13AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Hey, Lai.
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 06:34:33PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> > > This patchset contains the following 31 patches.
>> > >
>> > >  0001-workqueue-make-sanity-checks-less-punshing-using-WAR.patch
>> >
>> > >  0002-workqueue-make-workqueue_lock-irq-safe.patch
>> >
>> > workqueue_lock protects too many things. We can introduce different locks
>> > for different purpose later.
>>
>> I don't know.  My general attitude toward locking is the simpler the
>> better.  None of the paths protected by workqueue_lock are hot.
>> There's no actual benefit in making them finer grained.
>
> Heh, I need to make workqueues and pools protected by a mutex rather
> than spinlock, so I'm breaking out the locking after all.  This is
> gonna be a separate series of patches and it seems like there are
> gonna be three locks - wq_mutex (pool and workqueues), pwq_lock
> (spinlock protecting pwqs), wq_mayday_lock (lock for the mayday list).

Glad to hear this.
wq_mayday_lock is needed at least. spin_lock_irq(workqueue_lock)
with long loop in its C.S hurts RT people.

Thanks,
Lai

>
> 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/
--
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/