From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934247AbcIEOOP (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2016 10:14:15 -0400 Received: from rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de ([129.143.116.10]:47894 "EHLO rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934152AbcIEOOI (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2016 10:14:08 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 16:14:06 +0200 From: Andreas Mohr To: Tejun Heo Cc: Andreas Mohr , Qiao Zhou , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Question] about patch: don't use [delayed_]work_pending() Message-ID: <20160905141406.GA6430@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> References: <20160904012939.GA10924@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> <20160905124139.GC20784@mtj.duckdns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160905124139.GC20784@mtj.duckdns.org> X-Priority: none User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.0 (2016-08-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 08:41:39AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 03:29:39AM +0200, Andreas Mohr wrote: > > Reason: any other [early-boot] invoker of cancel_delayed_work_sync() > > would hit the same issue, > > without any fix then available locally each. > > > > This may or may not be intentional. > > Just wanted to point it out. > > idk, invoking a blocking API from early boot is pretty special (as > with everything during early boot), so I think it's fine to handle > them as execeptions. Yup, this sounds like the rationale that I would have expected. Andreas