From: Juergen Quade <quade@hsnr.de>
To: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru
Cc: nagendra_tomar@adaptec.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
wa@almesberger.net
Subject: Re: tasklet_kill will always hang for recursive tasklets on a UP
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 18:17:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030828161722.GA4384@hsnr.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200308281553.TAA22047@dub.inr.ac.ru>
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 07:53:11PM +0400, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru wrote:
> Hello!
>
> > Here we have it! In my opintion, the line
> >
> > clear_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state);
> >
> > is just a _BUG_.
>
> No, really. The sense of tasklet_kill() is that tasklet is under complete
> control of caller upon exit from it. This clear_bit just makes some (only
> marginally useful) reinitialization for the case the user will want
> to reuse the struct. Essentially, after tasklet_unlock_wait() you can do
> everything with the struct, it is not an alive object anymore.
Because the function as it is written is useless, but with
changing from "clear_bit" to "set_bit" it would be - at least partly -
useful, I still believe, it is a bug. Does anybody know, who is
responsible for the function?
> > 2. we should find some means to make it usable for recursive tasklets.
>
> I would not say it is easy. When tasklet is enqueued on another cpu you
> have no way to stop it unless you are in process context, where you can
> sit and wait for completion.
For sure, not easy.
But tasklet_kill will mostly be called in process context, won't it?
Juergen.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-28 16:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-25 0:00 tasklet_kill will always hang for recursive tasklets on a UP Nagendra Singh Tomar
2003-08-25 1:53 ` Nagendra Singh Tomar
2003-08-25 14:11 ` Juergen Quade
2003-08-25 17:14 ` Nagendra Singh Tomar
2003-08-27 18:21 ` Juergen Quade
2003-08-27 17:46 ` Nagendra Singh Tomar
2003-08-28 15:29 ` Juergen Quade
2003-08-28 15:53 ` kuznet
2003-08-28 16:17 ` Juergen Quade [this message]
2003-08-29 2:22 ` Werner Almesberger
2003-08-26 5:48 ` Werner Almesberger
2003-08-25 18:45 ` Nagendra Singh Tomar
2003-08-26 7:38 ` Werner Almesberger
2003-08-26 8:32 ` Juergen Quade
2003-08-26 17:56 ` Werner Almesberger
2003-08-27 1:47 ` kuznet
2003-08-26 16:17 ` Nagendra Singh Tomar
2003-08-28 13:17 ` kuznet
2003-08-28 16:25 ` Nagendra Singh Tomar
2003-09-04 13:25 ` kuznet
2003-08-29 2:30 ` Werner Almesberger
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=20030828161722.GA4384@hsnr.de \
--to=quade@hsnr.de \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nagendra_tomar@adaptec.com \
--cc=wa@almesberger.net \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox