* [RFC] Bluetooth: Use flush_work instead of cancel_work
@ 2012-01-13 12:16 Emeltchenko Andrei
2012-01-13 13:18 ` Marcel Holtmann
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Emeltchenko Andrei @ 2012-01-13 12:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-bluetooth
From: Andrei Emeltchenko <andrei.emeltchenko@intel.com>
Fix deadlock when cancelling delayed work.
[ 584.676126] ======================================================
[ 584.676126] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
[ 584.676126] 3.2.0-rc2niko+ #44
[ 584.676126] -------------------------------------------------------
[ 584.676126] kworker/u:1/30 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 584.676126] (&hdev->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<f81f001c>] hci_conn_timeout+0x6c/0x190 [bluetooth]
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126] but task is already holding lock:
[ 584.676126] ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126] which lock already depends on the new lock.
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126] -> #1 ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}:
[ 584.676126] [<c1086748>] lock_acquire+0x88/0x110
[ 584.676126] [<c1066041>] wait_on_work+0x61/0x210
[ 584.676126] [<c106630a>] __cancel_work_timer+0x6a/0x110
[ 584.676126] [<c10663c0>] cancel_delayed_work_sync+0x10/0x20
[ 584.676126] [<f81f935b>] hci_event_packet+0x3b2b/0x4610 [bluetooth]
[ 584.676126] [<f81ea78e>] hci_rx_work+0x20e/0x4c0 [bluetooth]
[ 584.676126] [<c1065aec>] process_one_work+0x17c/0x460
[ 584.676126] [<c10672e4>] worker_thread+0x124/0x2c0
[ 584.676126] [<c106be44>] kthread+0x84/0x90
[ 584.676126] [<c1567f42>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/0x10
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126] -> #0 (&hdev->lock){+.+.+.}:
[ 584.676126] [<c10852cd>] __lock_acquire+0xc0d/0x1ab0
[ 584.676126] [<c1086748>] lock_acquire+0x88/0x110
[ 584.676126] [<c155de50>] mutex_lock_nested+0x70/0x320
[ 584.676126] [<f81f001c>] hci_conn_timeout+0x6c/0x190 [bluetooth]
[ 584.676126] [<c1065aec>] process_one_work+0x17c/0x460
[ 584.676126] [<c10672e4>] worker_thread+0x124/0x2c0
[ 584.676126] [<c106be44>] kthread+0x84/0x90
[ 584.676126] [<c1567f42>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/0x10
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126] CPU0 CPU1
[ 584.676126] ---- ----
[ 584.676126] lock((&(&conn->disc_work)->work));
[ 584.676126] lock(&hdev->lock);
[ 584.676126] lock((&(&conn->disc_work)->work));
[ 584.676126] lock(&hdev->lock);
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 584.676126]
[ 584.676126] 2 locks held by kworker/u:1/30:
[ 584.676126] #0: (hdev->name){.+.+.+}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
[ 584.676126] #1: ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
Signed-off-by: Andrei Emeltchenko <andrei.emeltchenko@intel.com>
---
net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c b/net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c
index 3db4324..aa33fa2 100644
--- a/net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c
+++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c
@@ -437,7 +437,7 @@ int hci_conn_del(struct hci_conn *conn)
del_timer(&conn->idle_timer);
- cancel_delayed_work_sync(&conn->disc_work);
+ flush_delayed_work_sync(&conn->disc_work);
del_timer(&conn->auto_accept_timer);
--
1.7.4.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC] Bluetooth: Use flush_work instead of cancel_work
2012-01-13 12:16 [RFC] Bluetooth: Use flush_work instead of cancel_work Emeltchenko Andrei
@ 2012-01-13 13:18 ` Marcel Holtmann
2012-01-13 15:07 ` Emeltchenko Andrei
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Marcel Holtmann @ 2012-01-13 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Emeltchenko Andrei; +Cc: linux-bluetooth
Hi Andrei,
> Fix deadlock when cancelling delayed work.
>
> [ 584.676126] ======================================================
> [ 584.676126] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> [ 584.676126] 3.2.0-rc2niko+ #44
> [ 584.676126] -------------------------------------------------------
> [ 584.676126] kworker/u:1/30 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 584.676126] (&hdev->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<f81f001c>] hci_conn_timeout+0x6c/0x190 [bluetooth]
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126] but task is already holding lock:
> [ 584.676126] ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126] -> #1 ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}:
> [ 584.676126] [<c1086748>] lock_acquire+0x88/0x110
> [ 584.676126] [<c1066041>] wait_on_work+0x61/0x210
> [ 584.676126] [<c106630a>] __cancel_work_timer+0x6a/0x110
> [ 584.676126] [<c10663c0>] cancel_delayed_work_sync+0x10/0x20
> [ 584.676126] [<f81f935b>] hci_event_packet+0x3b2b/0x4610 [bluetooth]
> [ 584.676126] [<f81ea78e>] hci_rx_work+0x20e/0x4c0 [bluetooth]
> [ 584.676126] [<c1065aec>] process_one_work+0x17c/0x460
> [ 584.676126] [<c10672e4>] worker_thread+0x124/0x2c0
> [ 584.676126] [<c106be44>] kthread+0x84/0x90
> [ 584.676126] [<c1567f42>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/0x10
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126] -> #0 (&hdev->lock){+.+.+.}:
> [ 584.676126] [<c10852cd>] __lock_acquire+0xc0d/0x1ab0
> [ 584.676126] [<c1086748>] lock_acquire+0x88/0x110
> [ 584.676126] [<c155de50>] mutex_lock_nested+0x70/0x320
> [ 584.676126] [<f81f001c>] hci_conn_timeout+0x6c/0x190 [bluetooth]
> [ 584.676126] [<c1065aec>] process_one_work+0x17c/0x460
> [ 584.676126] [<c10672e4>] worker_thread+0x124/0x2c0
> [ 584.676126] [<c106be44>] kthread+0x84/0x90
> [ 584.676126] [<c1567f42>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/0x10
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 584.676126] ---- ----
> [ 584.676126] lock((&(&conn->disc_work)->work));
> [ 584.676126] lock(&hdev->lock);
> [ 584.676126] lock((&(&conn->disc_work)->work));
> [ 584.676126] lock(&hdev->lock);
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126] *** DEADLOCK ***
> [ 584.676126]
> [ 584.676126] 2 locks held by kworker/u:1/30:
> [ 584.676126] #0: (hdev->name){.+.+.+}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
> [ 584.676126] #1: ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrei Emeltchenko <andrei.emeltchenko@intel.com>
> ---
> net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Regards
Marcel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC] Bluetooth: Use flush_work instead of cancel_work
2012-01-13 13:18 ` Marcel Holtmann
@ 2012-01-13 15:07 ` Emeltchenko Andrei
2012-01-15 21:10 ` Ulisses Furquim
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Emeltchenko Andrei @ 2012-01-13 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marcel Holtmann; +Cc: linux-bluetooth
Hi Marcel,
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 02:18:43PM +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Andrei,
>
> > Fix deadlock when cancelling delayed work.
> >
> > [ 584.676126] ======================================================
> > [ 584.676126] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> > [ 584.676126] 3.2.0-rc2niko+ #44
> > [ 584.676126] -------------------------------------------------------
> > [ 584.676126] kworker/u:1/30 is trying to acquire lock:
> > [ 584.676126] (&hdev->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<f81f001c>] hci_conn_timeout+0x6c/0x190 [bluetooth]
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126] but task is already holding lock:
> > [ 584.676126] ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126] -> #1 ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}:
> > [ 584.676126] [<c1086748>] lock_acquire+0x88/0x110
> > [ 584.676126] [<c1066041>] wait_on_work+0x61/0x210
> > [ 584.676126] [<c106630a>] __cancel_work_timer+0x6a/0x110
> > [ 584.676126] [<c10663c0>] cancel_delayed_work_sync+0x10/0x20
> > [ 584.676126] [<f81f935b>] hci_event_packet+0x3b2b/0x4610 [bluetooth]
> > [ 584.676126] [<f81ea78e>] hci_rx_work+0x20e/0x4c0 [bluetooth]
> > [ 584.676126] [<c1065aec>] process_one_work+0x17c/0x460
> > [ 584.676126] [<c10672e4>] worker_thread+0x124/0x2c0
> > [ 584.676126] [<c106be44>] kthread+0x84/0x90
> > [ 584.676126] [<c1567f42>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/0x10
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126] -> #0 (&hdev->lock){+.+.+.}:
> > [ 584.676126] [<c10852cd>] __lock_acquire+0xc0d/0x1ab0
> > [ 584.676126] [<c1086748>] lock_acquire+0x88/0x110
> > [ 584.676126] [<c155de50>] mutex_lock_nested+0x70/0x320
> > [ 584.676126] [<f81f001c>] hci_conn_timeout+0x6c/0x190 [bluetooth]
> > [ 584.676126] [<c1065aec>] process_one_work+0x17c/0x460
> > [ 584.676126] [<c10672e4>] worker_thread+0x124/0x2c0
> > [ 584.676126] [<c106be44>] kthread+0x84/0x90
> > [ 584.676126] [<c1567f42>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/0x10
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126] other info that might help us debug this:
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126] CPU0 CPU1
> > [ 584.676126] ---- ----
> > [ 584.676126] lock((&(&conn->disc_work)->work));
> > [ 584.676126] lock(&hdev->lock);
> > [ 584.676126] lock((&(&conn->disc_work)->work));
> > [ 584.676126] lock(&hdev->lock);
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126] *** DEADLOCK ***
> > [ 584.676126]
> > [ 584.676126] 2 locks held by kworker/u:1/30:
> > [ 584.676126] #0: (hdev->name){.+.+.+}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
> > [ 584.676126] #1: ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrei Emeltchenko <andrei.emeltchenko@intel.com>
> > ---
> > net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c | 2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> Acked-by: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Apparently it does not fix it completely, the reason might be hci_dev_lock
in hci_conn_timeout. Maybe instead of lock we could use hold/put?
I will investigate this issue further.
Best regards
Andrei Emeltchenko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC] Bluetooth: Use flush_work instead of cancel_work
2012-01-13 15:07 ` Emeltchenko Andrei
@ 2012-01-15 21:10 ` Ulisses Furquim
2012-01-16 12:35 ` Emeltchenko Andrei
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ulisses Furquim @ 2012-01-15 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Emeltchenko Andrei, Marcel Holtmann, linux-bluetooth
Hi Andrei,
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Emeltchenko Andrei
<Andrei.Emeltchenko.news@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Marcel,
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 02:18:43PM +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
>> Hi Andrei,
>>
>> > Fix deadlock when cancelling delayed work.
>> >
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> > [ =A0584.676126] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected=
]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] 3.2.0-rc2niko+ #44
>> > [ =A0584.676126] -----------------------------------------------------=
--
>> > [ =A0584.676126] kworker/u:1/30 is trying to acquire lock:
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0(&hdev->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<f81f001c>] hci_conn_t=
imeout+0x6c/0x190 [bluetooth]
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] but task is already holding lock:
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c1065=
a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] which lock already depends on the new lock.
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] -> #1 ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}:
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c1086748>] lock_acquire+0x88/0x110
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c1066041>] wait_on_work+0x61/0x210
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c106630a>] __cancel_work_timer+0x6a/=
0x110
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c10663c0>] cancel_delayed_work_sync+=
0x10/0x20
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<f81f935b>] hci_event_packet+0x3b2b/0=
x4610 [bluetooth]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<f81ea78e>] hci_rx_work+0x20e/0x4c0 [=
bluetooth]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c1065aec>] process_one_work+0x17c/0x=
460
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c10672e4>] worker_thread+0x124/0x2c0
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c106be44>] kthread+0x84/0x90
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c1567f42>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/=
0x10
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] -> #0 (&hdev->lock){+.+.+.}:
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c10852cd>] __lock_acquire+0xc0d/0x1a=
b0
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c1086748>] lock_acquire+0x88/0x110
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c155de50>] mutex_lock_nested+0x70/0x=
320
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<f81f001c>] hci_conn_timeout+0x6c/0x1=
90 [bluetooth]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c1065aec>] process_one_work+0x17c/0x=
460
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c10672e4>] worker_thread+0x124/0x2c0
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c106be44>] kthread+0x84/0x90
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0[<c1567f42>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/=
0x10
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] other info that might help us debug this:
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0CPU0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0CPU1
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0---- =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0----
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 lock((&(&conn->disc_work)->work));
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0lock(&hdev->lock);
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0lock((&(&conn->disc_work)->work));
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0 lock(&hdev->lock);
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0*** DEADLOCK ***
>> > [ =A0584.676126]
>> > [ =A0584.676126] 2 locks held by kworker/u:1/30:
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0#0: =A0(hdev->name){.+.+.+}, at: [<c1065a78>] proc=
ess_one_work+0x108/0x460
>> > [ =A0584.676126] =A0#1: =A0((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}, at: =
[<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Andrei Emeltchenko <andrei.emeltchenko@intel.com>
>> > ---
>> > =A0net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c | =A0 =A02 +-
>> > =A01 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> Acked-by: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
>
> Apparently it does not fix it completely, the reason might be hci_dev_loc=
k
> in hci_conn_timeout. Maybe instead of lock we could use hold/put?
>
> I will investigate this issue further.
I believe the real problem is to have a _sync() call for cancelling or
flushing the delayed work. While you are at it can you try if using
__cancel_delayed_work() fixes the problem, please? I guess with the
recent move to workqueues some _sync() calls were added that might
lead to deadlocks. I'm even thinking we might wanna replace all
cancel_dealyed_work_sync() calls with __cancel_dealyed_work() ones
would be good. I don't have time to test now, but if you do, please
try this too. Thanks a lot.
> Best regards
> Andrei Emeltchenko
Best regards,
--=20
Ulisses Furquim
ProFUSION embedded systems
http://profusion.mobi
Mobile: +55 19 9250 0942
Skype: ulissesffs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC] Bluetooth: Use flush_work instead of cancel_work
2012-01-15 21:10 ` Ulisses Furquim
@ 2012-01-16 12:35 ` Emeltchenko Andrei
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Emeltchenko Andrei @ 2012-01-16 12:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ulisses Furquim; +Cc: Marcel Holtmann, linux-bluetooth
Hi Ulisses,
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 07:10:27PM -0200, Ulisses Furquim wrote:
...
> >> > [ 584.676126] ======================================================
> >> > [ 584.676126] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> >> > [ 584.676126] 3.2.0-rc2niko+ #44
> >> > [ 584.676126] -------------------------------------------------------
...
> >> > [ 584.676126] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> >> > [ 584.676126]
> >> > [ 584.676126] CPU0 CPU1
> >> > [ 584.676126] ---- ----
> >> > [ 584.676126] lock((&(&conn->disc_work)->work));
> >> > [ 584.676126] lock(&hdev->lock);
> >> > [ 584.676126] lock((&(&conn->disc_work)->work));
> >> > [ 584.676126] lock(&hdev->lock);
> >> > [ 584.676126]
> >> > [ 584.676126] *** DEADLOCK ***
> >> > [ 584.676126]
> >> > [ 584.676126] 2 locks held by kworker/u:1/30:
> >> > [ 584.676126] #0: (hdev->name){.+.+.+}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
> >> > [ 584.676126] #1: ((&(&conn->disc_work)->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c1065a78>] process_one_work+0x108/0x460
> > Apparently it does not fix it completely, the reason might be hci_dev_lock
...
> > in hci_conn_timeout. Maybe instead of lock we could use hold/put?
> >
> > I will investigate this issue further.
>
> I believe the real problem is to have a _sync() call for cancelling or
> flushing the delayed work. While you are at it can you try if using
> __cancel_delayed_work() fixes the problem, please? I guess with the
> recent move to workqueues some _sync() calls were added that might
> lead to deadlocks. I'm even thinking we might wanna replace all
> cancel_dealyed_work_sync() calls with __cancel_dealyed_work() ones
> would be good. I don't have time to test now, but if you do, please
> try this too. Thanks a lot.
I've tested cancel_delayed_work and it works in my set of tests. It does
not report deadlock (at least here ;)).
I've just sent modified RFC v2.
Best regards
Andrei Emeltchenko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-01-16 12:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-01-13 12:16 [RFC] Bluetooth: Use flush_work instead of cancel_work Emeltchenko Andrei
2012-01-13 13:18 ` Marcel Holtmann
2012-01-13 15:07 ` Emeltchenko Andrei
2012-01-15 21:10 ` Ulisses Furquim
2012-01-16 12:35 ` Emeltchenko Andrei
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).