public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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.

  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