Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 29 Aug 2015 11:22:19 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee |
| |
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > We could add yet another cond_resched() in the reverse loop, or we can simply > > remove the reversal, as I do not think anything would depend on order of > > task_work_add() submitted works. > > So I think this should be ok, with things like file closing not really caring > about ordering as far as I can tell. > > However, has anybody gone through all the task-work users? I looked quickly at > the task_work_add() cases, and didn't see anything that looked like it would > care, but others should look too. In the vfs, theres' the delayed fput and mnt > freeing, and there's a keyring installation one. > > The threaded irq handlers use it as that exit-time hack, which certainly > shouldn't care, and there's some uprobe thing. > > Can anybody see anything fishy?
So I'm wondering, is there any strong reason why we couldn't use a double linked list and still do FIFO and remove that silly linear list walking hack?
Thanks,
Ingo
| |