On 01/09, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 07:38:15PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > We can't do this. We should thaw cwq->thread (which was bound to the
> > dead CPU) to complete CPU_DEAD event. So we still need some changes.
>
> I noticed that, but I presumed kthread_stop() will post a wakeup which
> will bring it out of frozen state. Looking at refrigerator(), I realize
> that is not possible.
>
> So CPU_DEAD should do a thaw_process on the kthread before doing a
> kthread_stop?
Probably we can do this, or that. In any case we need changes, that
was my point.
And the best change I believe is to _remove_ CPU_DEAD handling from
workqueue.c as I suggested before. This kthread_stop() is not a good
idea per se, it calls wake_up_process(), but we should in fact use
wake_up(&cwq->more_work). Yes, work->func() should be ready for the
false wakeups, but still.
But for now I hope the last "draft" patch is enough. I'll continue
on next weekend.
Oleg.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
