From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: "Adamson, Dros" <Weston.Adamson@netapp.com>,
"Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: nfsd oops on Linus' current tree.
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 17:15:03 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130103221503.GC2753@mtj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130103205221.GB2533@fieldses.org>
It's getting a bit repetitive but I really wanna steer people away
from implementing separate kthreads for wrong reasons. kthread is
surprisingly difficult to get right especially around freezing /
exiting / hotplugs and people get it subtly wrong very often.
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 03:52:21PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> No, I meant I was happy having my workqueue handled by a single
> dedicated thread, which I don't see a trivial way to do any more.
Because you don't need that. The old workqueue didn't give you
anything better than the current one. It was usually more difficult
to get right in terms of execution dependency because it introduced a
lot of unintended execution dependencies through
one-(per-cpu)-worker-per-workqueue rule.
If anyone can show me workqueue is deadlocking when it shouldn't I'll
be happy to look into it and fix it, but, up until now, most if not
all reported cases were through incorrect usage, and things definitely
don't work like described in this thread.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-03 22:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-21 15:33 Dave Jones
2012-12-21 18:08 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-12-21 18:40 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-12-21 23:08 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-12-21 23:15 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-12-21 23:26 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-12-21 23:36 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-12-21 23:45 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-01-03 16:28 ` Adamson, Dros
2013-01-03 20:11 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-01-03 20:27 ` Adamson, Dros
2013-01-03 20:52 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-01-03 22:15 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2013-01-03 22:08 ` Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 22:12 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-01-03 22:26 ` Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 22:34 ` Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 23:11 ` Myklebust, Trond
[not found] ` <1357254692.55285.33.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
2013-01-03 23:26 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-01-04 17:11 ` Adamson, Dros
2013-01-03 22:03 ` Tejun Heo
2013-01-03 23:08 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-12-22 0:48 ` [PATCH] Revert "nfsd: warn on odd reply state in nfsd_vfs_read" J. Bruce Fields
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=20130103221503.GC2753@mtj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=Weston.Adamson@netapp.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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
Powered by JetHome