Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream

Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yes sure. Note that this is documented:
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * Kill off a pending schedule_delayed_work().  Note that the work callback
> 	 * function may still be running on return from cancel_delayed_work().  Run
> 	 * flush_workqueue() or cancel_work_sync() to wait on it.
> 	 */

No, it isn't documented.  It says that the *work* callback may be running, but
does not mention the timer callback.  However, just looking at the
cancellation function source made it clear that this would wait for the timer
handler to return first.


However, is it worth just making cancel_delayed_work() a void function and not
returning anything?  I'm not sure the return value is very useful.

David
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] net/rxrpc: Convert to kthread API.
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] cfq: get rid of cfqq hash
• Next by Date: Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
• Previous by thread: Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
• Next by thread: Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]