lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 05/12] workqueue: don't wake up other workers in rescuer
    (cc'ing Ray Jui)

    On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 01:20:36AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
    > rescuer is NOT_RUNNING, so there is no sense when it wakes up other workers,
    > if there are available normal workers, they are already woken up when needed.
    >
    > Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
    > ---
    > kernel/workqueue.c | 8 --------
    > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
    >
    > diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
    > index c718b94..6c339bf 100644
    > --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
    > +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
    > @@ -2438,14 +2438,6 @@ repeat:
    >
    > process_scheduled_works(rescuer);
    >
    > - /*
    > - * Leave this gcwq. If keep_working() is %true, notify a
    > - * regular worker; otherwise, we end up with 0 concurrency
    > - * and stalling the execution.
    > - */
    > - if (keep_working(pool))
    > - wake_up_worker(pool);
    > -

    This was added by 7576958a9d5a4a6 ("workqueue: wake up a worker when a
    rescuer is leaving a gcwq") to fix a bug reported by Ray Jui.

    http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1098131

    I'm fairly sure it was a valid bug report. I don't think the
    depletion comes from concurrency management. It's just the lack of
    chaining which could lead to stall. What am I missing here?

    Thanks.

    --
    tejun


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-09-26 21:21    [W:3.612 / U:0.092 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site