Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:06:54 +0800 | From | Lai Jiangshan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 02/13] workqueue: fix work_busy() |
| |
于 2013/2/5 3:54, Tejun Heo 写道: > Hello, Lai. > > On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 02:41:25AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: >> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c >> index 973b290..d474a6c 100644 >> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c >> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c >> @@ -3443,8 +3443,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(workqueue_congested); >> * Test whether @work is currently pending or running. There is no >> * synchronization around this function and the test result is >> * unreliable and only useful as advisory hints or for debugging. >> - * Especially for reentrant wqs, the pending state might hide the >> - * running state. > > Yeap, this is no longer true. > >> * >> * RETURNS: >> * OR'd bitmask of WORK_BUSY_* bits. >> @@ -3453,15 +3451,13 @@ unsigned int work_busy(struct work_struct *work) >> { >> struct worker_pool *pool = get_work_pool(work); >> unsigned long flags; >> - unsigned int ret = 0; >> + unsigned int ret = work_pending(work) ? WORK_BUSY_PENDING : 0; > > I'd prefer this as a if() statement. > >> if (!pool) >> - return 0; >> + return ret; > > I'm a bit confused. When can we be pending w/o pool? >
grab the pending bits <==time==> really queued ^ this patch considers the work is busy in this time
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |