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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:18:04 +0200
From:	Tejun Heo <>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <>
CC:	Oleg Nesterov <>,
	Sridhar Samudrala <>,
	netdev <>,
	lkml <>,
	"" <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Dmitri Vorobiev <>,
	Jiri Kosina <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>, Andi Kleen <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH UPDATED 1/3] vhost: replace vhost_workqueue with per-vhost


On 07/26/2010 09:57 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> For freeze, it probably is okay but for stop, I think it's better to
>> keep the semantics straight forward.
> What are the semantics then? What do we want stop followed
> by queue and flush to do?

One scenario I can think of is the following.

 kthread_worker allows kthreads to be attached and stopped anytime, so
 if the caller stops the current worker while flushing is pending and
 attaches a new worker, the flushing which was pending will never

But, in general, it's nasty to allow execution and its completion to
be separated.  Things like that are likely to bite us back in obscure
ways.  I think it would be silly to have such oddity in generic code
when it can be avoided without too much trouble.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists