* [PATCH] workqueue: Fix flag collision
@ 2017-09-03 0:18 Ben Hutchings
2017-09-05 13:34 ` Tejun Heo
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Ben Hutchings @ 2017-09-03 0:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tejun Heo; +Cc: Lai Jiangshan, linux-kernel, stable
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1199 bytes --]
Commit 0a94efb5acbb ("workqueue: implicit ordered attribute should be
overridable") introduced a __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT flag but gave it the
same value as __WQ_LEGACY. I don't believe these were intended to
mean the same thing, so renumber __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT.
Fixes: 0a94efb5acbb ("workqueue: implicit ordered attribute should be ...")
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
---
include/linux/workqueue.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/workqueue.h b/include/linux/workqueue.h
index db6dc9dc0482..1c49431f3121 100644
--- a/include/linux/workqueue.h
+++ b/include/linux/workqueue.h
@@ -323,8 +323,8 @@ enum {
__WQ_DRAINING = 1 << 16, /* internal: workqueue is draining */
__WQ_ORDERED = 1 << 17, /* internal: workqueue is ordered */
- __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT = 1 << 18, /* internal: alloc_ordered_workqueue() */
__WQ_LEGACY = 1 << 18, /* internal: create*_workqueue() */
+ __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT = 1 << 19, /* internal: alloc_ordered_workqueue() */
WQ_MAX_ACTIVE = 512, /* I like 512, better ideas? */
WQ_MAX_UNBOUND_PER_CPU = 4, /* 4 * #cpus for unbound wq */
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 811 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] workqueue: Fix flag collision
2017-09-03 0:18 [PATCH] workqueue: Fix flag collision Ben Hutchings
@ 2017-09-05 13:34 ` Tejun Heo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Tejun Heo @ 2017-09-05 13:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Hutchings; +Cc: Lai Jiangshan, linux-kernel, stable
On Sun, Sep 03, 2017 at 01:18:41AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Commit 0a94efb5acbb ("workqueue: implicit ordered attribute should be
> overridable") introduced a __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT flag but gave it the
> same value as __WQ_LEGACY. I don't believe these were intended to
> mean the same thing, so renumber __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT.
>
> Fixes: 0a94efb5acbb ("workqueue: implicit ordered attribute should be ...")
> Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Oops, applied to wq/for-4.14.
Thanks.
--
tejun
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-09-05 13:34 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-09-03 0:18 [PATCH] workqueue: Fix flag collision Ben Hutchings
2017-09-05 13:34 ` Tejun Heo
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox