[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140212162311.GB26809@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 11:23:11 -0500
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
Doug Thompson <dougthompson@...ssion.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] edac, poll timeout cannot be zero
Hello,
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 04:57:53PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Ha, so this sounds like the issue because the splat happens
> when updating /sys/.../edac_mc_poll_msec and it goes and calls
> edac_mc_workq_setup()...
>
> And this code is pretty old and edac_mc_workq_setup() is used both
> when one inits an edac driver and also when one wants to change the
> polling period (edac_mc_reset_delay_period) and thus needs to mod the
> workqueue's timeout.
>
> So I'm guessing a simple fix would be to differentiate between the two
> paths, something like the diff below.
>
> Or is there a reliable way to check whether a workqueue has been
> initialized already, say, something like
>
> if (work->func)
Hah... can't you just do it on object initialization? It's a bit
nasty and fragile to game initialization state.
> or so... I.e., what PREPARE_WORK() does?
It allows you to change the callback without breaking the
synchronization. Of course, if there's a pending work item, it may or
may not execute the newly assigned function. It's also a bit nasty
and has only few users in the whole kernel and I think we might wanna
get rid of them.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists