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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox