Re: [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable

Jarek Poplawski
2007-05-08T14:06:31Z

On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:56:48PM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > So, we should either return 0, or add BUG_ON(!cwq).
>
> ...And you prefer endless loop. Seems brave!

Sorry! (Maybe you're not so brave?) Seems clear _PENDING should
save us here - I hope.

Bye, bye,
Jarek P.