From: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
To: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl>
Cc: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] workqueue: debug possible endless loop in cancel_rearming_delayed_work
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:53:54 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070420085354.GP32602149@melbourne.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070420081325.GB1695@ff.dom.local>
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:13:26AM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:46:18AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 08:54:04AM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > IMHO cancel_rearming_delayed_work is dangerous place:
> >
> > Agreed - I spent a couple of hours today learning why it
> > can only be used on work functions that always rearm...
> >
> > > - 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.
> >
> > Easier than that - have a work function that rearms only if there's
> > more work to do in the future. You only arm the timer when you
> > have work to do, and it only rearms if there's more work to
> > do in the future (e.g. rotating expiry lists).
> >
> > i.e. while there's more work to do, you need to call
> > cancel_rearming_delayed_work() to stop it reliably, but if you race
> > with the work function not restarting itself, you hang.....
>
> I'm not sure I correctly get your point, but according to
> this comment:
>
> " * cancel_rearming_delayed_work - reliably kill off a delayed
> keventd work whose handler rearms the delayed work."
>
> there is a question, whether a function that "rearms only if"
> - "rearms".
Right. Given that the bug I was initially trying to solve was a race
killing off a handler that was rearming itself, that comment says to
me "this is the right thing to do".
> It seems the author of this comment didn't think
> so and it was obvious to him/her cancel_rearming_delayed_work
> wasn't intended for this case. At first I thought it's only a
> language question - now, I see it's probably logical, too.
Yes, after spending another two hours working out why my fix was
then hanging in cancel_rearming_delayed_work() I was a little bit
annoyed at the now obviously misleading comment. Five minutes later
I'd fixed the bug properly. A better comment would have saved me two
hours of wasted time.....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-20 8:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-19 6:54 [PATCH -mm] workqueue: debug possible endless loop in cancel_rearming_delayed_work Jarek Poplawski
2007-04-19 7:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-04-19 8:28 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-04-19 14:48 ` David Chinner
2007-04-19 14:46 ` David Chinner
2007-04-20 8:13 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-04-20 8:53 ` David Chinner [this message]
2007-04-20 10:21 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-04-20 11:01 ` David Chinner
2007-04-20 12:12 ` [PATCH] workqueue: cancel_rearming_delayed_work/workqueue usage warning Jarek Poplawski
2007-04-20 17:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-04-23 9:41 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-04-19 17:07 ` [PATCH -mm] workqueue: debug possible endless loop in cancel_rearming_delayed_work Chuck Ebbert
2007-04-20 7:14 ` Jarek Poplawski
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-04-20 11:09 Jarek Poplawski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070420085354.GP32602149@melbourne.sgi.com \
--to=dgc@sgi.com \
--cc=jarkao2@o2.pl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.