linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] workqueue: add __WQ_FREEZING and remove POOL

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]

Message-ID: <CACvQF53uo0KCY20PyO8LKhs9g0Mt-OSJdv4F0P-cODWyL-TxQg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 21 Apr 2013 00:12:14 +0800
From:	Lai Jiangshan <eag0628@...il.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] workqueue: add __WQ_FREEZING and remove POOL_FREEZING

Please forget all my other patches.

But these 1/7 and 2/7 __WQ_FREEZING patches can be in 3.10

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:12 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hello, Lai.
>
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 10:05:32AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> @@ -4757,25 +4747,16 @@ void thaw_workqueues(void)
>>  {
>>       struct workqueue_struct *wq;
>>       struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
>> -     struct worker_pool *pool;
>> -     int pi;
>>
>>       mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
>>
>>       if (!workqueue_freezing)
>>               goto out_unlock;
>>
>> -     /* clear FREEZING */
>> -     for_each_pool(pool, pi) {
>> -             spin_lock_irq(&pool->lock);
>> -             WARN_ON_ONCE(!(pool->flags & POOL_FREEZING));
>> -             pool->flags &= ~POOL_FREEZING;
>> -             spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock);
>> -     }
>> -
>>       /* restore max_active and repopulate worklist */
>>       list_for_each_entry(wq, &workqueues, list) {
>>               mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
>> +             wq->flags &= ~__WQ_FREEZING;
>
> I want an assertion here.

freezing codes is very simple for verifying.

> Maybe we can fold the next patch into this
> one and add WARN_ON_ONCE() here?

I consider the two patches are different intent.

Thanks,
Lai

>
>>               for_each_pwq(pwq, wq)
>>                       pwq_adjust_max_active(pwq);
>>               mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
>
> 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/