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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2014 22:26:54 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Austin Schuh <austin@...oton-tech.com> cc: Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>, Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> Subject: Re: Filesystem lockup with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Austin Schuh wrote: > I think I might have an answer for my own question, but I would > appreciate someone else to double check. If list_empty erroneously > returns that there is work to do when there isn't work to do, we wake > up an extra worker which then goes back to sleep. Not a big loss. If > list_empty erroneously returns that there isn't work to do when there > is, this should only be because someone is modifying the work list. > When they finish, as far as I can tell, all callers then check to see > if a worker needs to be started up, and start one. Precisely. -- 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