On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 01:07:11PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > IMHO cancel_rearming_delayed_work is dangerous place:
> >
> > - it assumes a work function always rearms (with no exception),
> > which probably isn't explained enough now (but anyway should
> > be checked in such loops);
> >
> > - probably possible (theoretical) scenario: a few work
> > functions rearm themselves with very short, equal times;
> > before flush_workqueue ends, their timers are already
> > fired, so cancel_delayed_work has nothing to do.
> >
> > Maybe this patch could check, if I'm not dreaming...
> >
> > PS: of course the counter value below is a question of taste
>
> Okay, an easy test for it: insmod netconsole ; rmmod netconsole
>
> In 2.6.20.x it loops forever and cancel_rearming_delayed_work()
> is part of the trace...
Sure, but the dreaming test is more needed for the second
point - I mean - if it's theoretical only? The first scenario
is in my opinion assured logically - there was only a question,
whether it could be detected by other means - and it seems not.
Cheers,
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/
[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]
