On 04/20, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>
> Here is my proposal to make things clearer:
> (this time on 2.6.21-rc7)
>
> CC: David Chinner <[email protected]>
> CC: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jarek Poplawski <[email protected]>
>
> ---
>
> diff -Nurp 2.6.21-rc7-/kernel/workqueue.c 2.6.21-rc7/kernel/workqueue.c
> --- 2.6.21-rc7-/kernel/workqueue.c 2007-04-18 10:14:16.000000000 +0200
> +++ 2.6.21-rc7/kernel/workqueue.c 2007-04-20 13:56:51.000000000 +0200
> @@ -662,6 +662,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(flush_scheduled_work);
> * cancel_rearming_delayed_workqueue - reliably kill off a delayed work whose handler rearms the delayed work.
> * @wq: the controlling workqueue structure
> * @dwork: the delayed work struct
> + *
> + * WARNING: use only with handlers, which rearm unconditionally with delay > 0
> */
Nit: it is ok if the work re-arms itself with delay == 0 "sometimes". What we
need is that the handler use delay > 0 eventually.
I'd suggest to re-diff against -mm tree. I don't think this patch can find its
way to the soon to be released 2.6.21.
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]
