From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] introduce __cancel_delayed_work()
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:00:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090828180015.GB19326@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090828175931.GA19326@redhat.com>
cancel_delayed_work() has to use del_timer_sync() to guarantee the
timer function is not running after return. But most users doesn't
actually need this, and del_timer_sync() has problems: it is not
useable from interrupt, and it depends on every lock which could
be taken from irq.
Introduce __cancel_delayed_work() which calls del_timer() instead.
The immediate reason for this patch is
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13757
but hopefully this helper makes sense anyway.
As for 13757 bug, actually we need requeue_delayed_work(), but its
semantics is not clear yet.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
--- MINI/include/linux/workqueue.h~CDW 2009-08-27 20:17:08.000000000 +0200
+++ MINI/include/linux/workqueue.h 2009-08-27 20:22:48.000000000 +0200
@@ -240,6 +240,21 @@ static inline int cancel_delayed_work(st
return ret;
}
+/*
+ * Like above, but uses del_timer() instead of del_timer_sync(). This means,
+ * if it returns 0 the timer function may be running and the queueing is in
+ * progress.
+ */
+static inline int __cancel_delayed_work(struct delayed_work *work)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = del_timer(&work->timer);
+ if (ret)
+ work_clear_pending(&work->work);
+ return ret;
+}
+
extern int cancel_delayed_work_sync(struct delayed_work *work);
/* Obsolete. use cancel_delayed_work_sync() */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-28 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-20 21:51 Is adding requeue_delayed_work() a good idea Roland Dreier
2009-08-21 11:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-08-21 21:53 ` Roland Dreier
2009-08-22 10:35 ` Stefan Richter
2009-08-24 18:01 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-08-24 21:11 ` Roland Dreier
2009-08-25 9:39 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-08-26 18:42 ` Roland Dreier
2009-08-28 17:59 ` [PATCH 0/1] introduce __cancel_delayed_work() Oleg Nesterov
2009-08-28 18:00 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2009-09-01 16:09 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Roland Dreier
2009-09-01 16:40 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2009-09-01 22:29 ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-01 0:44 ` Is adding requeue_delayed_work() a good idea Dmitry Torokhov
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=20090828180015.GB19326@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
--cc=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®