From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>,
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>,
David <david@unsolicited.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 3.0 release
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 04:27:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110723022715.GB21089@mtj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwX55HhzyPsb5vx-=xkHpWJBH0481ZFWcXnNzH1M6zhdg@mail.gmail.com>
Hello, Stephen, Linus.
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:35:16PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Stephen Hemminger
> <shemminger@vyatta.com> wrote:
> >
> > The workqueue code should have a fallback and not try and
> > do anything if being called from IRQ.
>
> Fair enough. Especially since one of the *points* of workqueues is
> indeed to schedule stuff from irqs and that cannot be done
> immediately.
>
> Tejun?
It seems to have been already tracked down but, just to be clear.
Nothing changed regarding synchronization requirements for all the
queue, flush and cancel functions. If it worked before cmwq, it
should work with cmwq.
While on the topic, we do have some workqueue API problems. The
delayed ones are a bit screwy. e.g. requeueing an already pending
delayed work item should probably update the timer but it doesn't andp
we have a bunch of users doing cancel/requeue or using separate timers
for that. Also, the cancel/flush[_sync] variants are subtly different
making using the correct one difficult, which has possibility of
introducing bugs which are extremely difficult to reproduce.
Again, most of these had accumulated well before cmwq came into the
picture. I think we need to make workqueue simpler and easier to use.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-23 2:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CA+55aFxakA2U+oMJ1T7awTYa+p6xp9N0aCbfrUqgkF7BJ8gnQw@mail.gmail.com>
2011-07-22 19:11 ` Linux 3.0 release David
2011-07-22 19:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-07-22 19:44 ` Ben Greear
2011-07-22 20:32 ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-07-22 20:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-07-23 2:27 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2011-07-23 2:30 ` Tejun Heo
2011-07-22 21:26 ` Francois Romieu
2011-07-22 22:09 ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-07-22 22:53 ` [PATCH] net: allow netif_carrier to be called safely from IRQ Stephen Hemminger
2011-07-23 0:16 ` David Miller
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=20110723022715.GB21089@mtj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=david@unsolicited.net \
--cc=greearb@candelatech.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shemminger@vyatta.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).