[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140221015935.GF6897@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 20:59:35 -0500
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
Cc: laijs@...fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Chris Boot <bootc@...tc.net>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
target-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] firewire: don't use PREPARE_DELAYED_WORK
Hello,
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:44:46PM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
> >+static void fw_device_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
> >+{
> >+ struct fw_device *device = container_of(to_delayed_work(work),
> >+ struct fw_device, work);
>
> I think this needs an smp_rmb() here.
The patch is equivalent transformation and the whole thing is
guaranteed to have gone through pool->lock. No explicit rmb
necessary.
> IOW, the beginning of the work function should act like a barrier in
> the same way that queue_work_on() (et. al.) already does.
workqueue already has enough barriers; otherwise, the whole kernel
would have crumbled long time ago.
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