* Re: [PATCH v3] rhashtable: Bounce deferred worker kick through irq_work
[not found] <20260421060326.2836354-1-tj@kernel.org>
@ 2026-05-12 6:07 ` Hillf Danton
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Hillf Danton @ 2026-05-12 6:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tejun Heo
Cc: Herbert Xu, Thomas Graf, Andrew Morton, linux-crypto,
linux-kernel
On Mon, 20 Apr 2026 20:03:26 -1000 Tejun Heo wrote:
> --- a/lib/rhashtable.c
> +++ b/lib/rhashtable.c
> @@ -441,10 +441,33 @@ static void rht_deferred_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>
> mutex_unlock(&ht->mutex);
>
> + /*
> + * Re-arm via @run_work, not @run_irq_work.
> + * rhashtable_free_and_destroy() drains async work as irq_work_sync()
> + * followed by cancel_work_sync(). If this site queued irq_work while
> + * cancel_work_sync() was waiting for us, irq_work_sync() would already
> + * have returned and the stale irq_work could fire post-teardown.
> + * cancel_work_sync() natively handles self-requeue on @run_work.
> + */
> if (err)
> schedule_work(&ht->run_work);
> }
>
Two cents: add BUG to capture the failure of handling self-requeue.
--- x/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ y/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -2369,6 +2369,10 @@ retry:
work_flags |= WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE;
insert_work(pwq, work, &pwq->inactive_works, work_flags);
}
+ do {
+ unsigned long data = *work_data_bits(work);
+ BUG_ON(data & WORK_OFFQ_DISABLE_MASK);
+ } while (0);
out:
raw_spin_unlock(&pool->lock);
--
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread