[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180109034211.GC3668920@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 19:42:11 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Prateek Sood <prsood@...eaurora.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, avagin@...il.com,
mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, sramana@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup/cpuset: fix circular locking dependency
Hello, Paul.
On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 04:31:27PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> +static int __init rcu_init_wq_rescuer(void)
> +{
> + WARN_ON(init_rescuer(rcu_gp_workqueue));
> + return 0;
> +}
> +core_initcall(rcu_init_wq_rescuer);
So, what I don't get is why RCU needs to call this explicitly.
core_initcall() is after workqueue_init() anyway. Why am I missing?
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists