From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1759230Ab1F1SRe (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:17:34 -0400
Received: from mail-vx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]:43837 "EHLO
	mail-vx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1760639Ab1F1SQd (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:16:33 -0400
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:16:54 -0300
From: "Gustavo F. Padovan" <padovan@profusion.mobi>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, marcel@holtmann.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/1] workqueue: Add mod_delayed_work()
Message-ID: <20110628181654.GC23183@joana>
Mail-Followup-To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	marcel@holtmann.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
References: <1308954457-21487-1-git-send-email-padovan@profusion.mobi>
 <1308954457-21487-2-git-send-email-padovan@profusion.mobi>
 <20110625114331.GT30101@htj.dyndns.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110625114331.GT30101@htj.dyndns.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Tejun,

* Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> [2011-06-25 13:43:31 +0200]:

> Hello,
> 
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 07:27:37PM -0300, Gustavo F. Padovan wrote:
> > mod_delayed_work() updates a timer if the work is pending otherwise calls
> > queue_delayed_work_on() to queue the work with the specified delay.
> > 
> > Call cancel_delayed_work_sync() and then queue_delayed_work() again to
> > change a timer's delays is too expensive (and requires process context).
> > Istead we call mod_delayed_work() to only modify the timer's timeout.
> 
> Yes, this part of the interface is lacking.  It might be best to
> modify queue_delayed_work() to adjust the timer according to the new
> timeout but we would need to audit the current users to make sure
> nothing breaks and I agree introducing a new function probably makes
> sense.
> 
> > +int mod_delayed_work(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
> > +			struct delayed_work *dwork, unsigned long delay)
> > +{
> > +	struct timer_list *timer = &dwork->timer;
> > +	struct work_struct *work = &dwork->work;
> > +
> > +	if (!test_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT, work_data_bits(work)))
> > +		return queue_delayed_work_on(-1, wq, dwork, delay);
> > +
> > +	BUG_ON(!timer_pending(timer));
> > +
> > +	mod_timer(timer, jiffies + delay);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> 
> But I think the current implementation is as it is because modifying
> delayed work safely wasn't very simple.  The above code is broken in
> multiple ways - a delayed work could be pending without timer pending,
> and timer may expire after test_bit() but before the rest of the code.
> 
> I haven't thought about it too hard but think it would require the
> timer sync part of __cancel_work_timer() (sans wait_on_work()) to get
> it correctly.  Care to delve into it?

Sure, I can do that. I'm kind of stuck in the Bluetooth changes I need to do
due to this workqueue patch. I'll send a -v2 soon.

	Gustavo