From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / QoS: Fix workqueue deadlock when using pm_qos_update_request_timeout()
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 22:49:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4423040.Ds5TZlivfo@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130813170146.GC32719@htj.dyndns.org>
On Tuesday, August 13, 2013 01:01:46 PM Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 09:46:26AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > >> + if (PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE != req->node.prio)
> > >> + pm_qos_update_target(
> > >> + pm_qos_array[req->pm_qos_class]->constraints,
> > >> + &req->node, PM_QOS_UPDATE_REQ,
> > >> + PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
> > > Maybe it'd be cleaner to add a param or internal variant of
> > > pm_qos_update_request()?
> >
> > Maybe, but I was trying to make a minimal fix here.
>
> Hmmm.... it just looks like things can easily get out of sync with the
> complex function call.
Yes, that's just duplicated code.
> I don't think it'll be too invasive if you introduce an internal variant
> which doesn't do the canceling. Rafael, what do you think?
I'd move the part of pm_qos_update_request() below the
cancel_delayed_work_sync() to a separate static function that'd be
called from two places.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-13 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-08 20:13 Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 16:37 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 16:43 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 16:46 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 17:01 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 20:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2013-08-13 20:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 21:12 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 22:13 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 22:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=4423040.Ds5TZlivfo@vostro.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=tj@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®