[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BYAPR11MB2632E0A742A67B72536BF844FFBA9@BYAPR11MB2632.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2021 01:42:28 +0000
From: "Zhang, Qiang" <Qiang.Zhang@...driver.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
CC: Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: 回复: [PATCH] PM: remove PF_WQ_WORKER mask
________________________________________
发件人: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org>
发送时间: 2021年1月28日 2:16
收件人: Zhang, Qiang
抄送: Rafael Wysocki; Linux PM; Linux Kernel Mailing List
主题: Re: [PATCH] PM: remove PF_WQ_WORKER mask
[Please note: This e-mail is from an EXTERNAL e-mail address]
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 5:01 AM <qiang.zhang@...driver.com> wrote:
>
> From: Zqiang <qiang.zhang@...driver.com>
>
> Due to kworker also is kernel thread, it's already included
> PF_KTHREAD mask, so remove PF_WQ_WORKER mask.
>So you are saying that all threads having PF_WQ_WORKER set must also
>have PF_KTHREAD set, right?
yes
#define PF_KTHREAD 0x00200000
#define PF_WQ_WORKER 0x00000020
I tracing kwoker's task->flags as follows:
comm kworker/1:0, cpu 1, task->flags 0x4208060, delayed 3, func intel_fbc_work_fn
Thanks
Qiang
>That sounds correct, so I'm going to rewrite the changelog and apply
>the patch as 5.12 material, thanks!
> Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang.zhang@...driver.com>
> ---
> kernel/power/process.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/power/process.c b/kernel/power/process.c
> index 45b054b7b5ec..50cc63534486 100644
> --- a/kernel/power/process.c
> +++ b/kernel/power/process.c
> @@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ void thaw_kernel_threads(void)
>
> read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> for_each_process_thread(g, p) {
> - if (p->flags & (PF_KTHREAD | PF_WQ_WORKER))
> + if (p->flags & PF_KTHREAD)
> __thaw_task(p);
> }
> read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists