[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YpLLnx8/xpZIPMbi@geday>
Date: Sat, 28 May 2022 22:25:51 -0300
From: Geraldo Nascimento <geraldogabriel@...il.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: missing NOT while checking if Workqueue is
offline
On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 05:07:08PM -0300, Geraldo Nascimento wrote:
> Greetings,
>
Hi, again,
> This is a one-character patch but very important as the kernel workqueue
> __cancel_work_timer will cancel active work without the NOT operator
> added.
>
> During early boot wq_online is false so with the NOT added it will evaluate
> to true. Conversely, after boot is done, workqueue
I meant wq_online. After boot, wq_online will evaluate to true, current
code might as well have an if (true) there. I hurried up the patch
because if I'm right this is a major show stopper to drivers that make
use of cancel_work_timer(). I hit it through amdgpu in conjuction with amdkfd.
> is now true and we want
> it to evaluate to false because otherwise it will cancel important work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Geraldo Nascimento <geraldogabriel@...il.com>
>
> --- workqueue.c 2022-05-28 16:54:12.024176123 -0300
> +++ workqueue.c 2022-05-28 16:54:37.698176135 -0300
> @@ -3158,7 +3158,7 @@ static bool __cancel_work_timer(struct w
> * This allows canceling during early boot. We know that @work
> * isn't executing.
> */
> - if (wq_online)
> + if (!wq_online)
> __flush_work(work, true);
>
> clear_work_data(work);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists