lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/9 V3] workqueue: add non_manager_role_manager_mutex_unlock()
On 08/30/2012 05:17 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Lai.
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 05:16:01PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> gcwq_unbind_fn() is unsafe even it is called from a work item.
>> so we need non_manager_role_manager_mutex_unlock().
>>
>> If rebind_workers() is called from a work item, it is safe when there is
>> no CPU_INTENSIVE items. but we can't disable CPU_INTENSIVE items,
>> so it is still unsafe, we need non_manager_role_manager_mutex_unlock() too.
>
> Can you please elaborate? Why is it not safe if there are
> CPU_INTENSIVE items?
>
> Thanks.
>

Imaging there only two workers, they all have UNBOUND bit because the rebind_workers()
has not been called. The First one is processing work items, the second one is idle,
when the first one encounter the work item of rebind_workers() and handle it, at the same
the second one try to create workers and failed and go to process work items too.
but unlikely the second one encounters a CPU_INTENSIVE items, the nr_running is still
<=1 after the first one finish rebind_workers().

nr_running.
first one: process work item endless +0 or +1
second one: process the CPU_INTENSIVE item endless +0

No one can service for manager role.

Thanks.
Lai


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-31 03:41    [W:0.055 / U:1.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site