Re: [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable

On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:56:48PM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > So, we should either return 0, or add BUG_ON(!cwq).
> 
> ...And you prefer endless loop. Seems brave!

Sorry! (Maybe you're not so brave?) Seems clear _PENDING should
save us here - I hope.

Bye, bye,
Jarek P.
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable
    • From: Jarek Poplawski <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable
    • From: Jarek Poplawski <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable
• Next by Date: Re: New Mitsumi legacy CD-ROM driver
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable
• 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]