On Thursday 29 January 2009 06:14:40 Andrew Morton wrote: > It's vulnerable to the same deadlock, I think? Suppose we have: ... > - A calls work_on_cpu() and takes woc_mutex. > > - Before function_which_takes_L() has started to execute, task B takes L > then calls work_on_cpu() and task B blocks on woc_mutex. > > - Now function_which_takes_L() runs, and blocks on L Agreed, but now it's a fairly simple case. Both sides have to take lock L, and both have to call work_on_cpu. Workqueues are more generic and widespread, and an amazing amount of stuff gets called from them. That's why I felt uncomfortable with removing the one known problematic caller. Thanks, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
