Re: [PATCH] bcache: remove unnecessary flush_workqueue

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 3/27/22 3:20 PM, Li Lei wrote:
All pending works will be drained by destroy_workqueue(), no need to call
flush_workqueue() explicitly.

Signed-off-by: Li Lei <lilei@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c | 5 ++---
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c b/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c
index 9ee0005874cd..2a6d9f39a9b1 100644
--- a/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c
+++ b/drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c
@@ -793,10 +793,9 @@ static int bch_writeback_thread(void *arg)
  		}
  	}
- if (dc->writeback_write_wq) {
-		flush_workqueue(dc->writeback_write_wq);
+	if (dc->writeback_write_wq)
  		destroy_workqueue(dc->writeback_write_wq);
-	}
+
  	cached_dev_put(dc);
  	wait_for_kthread_stop();

The above code is from commit 7e865eba00a3 ("bcache: fix potential deadlock in cached_def_free()"). I explicitly added extra flush_workqueue() was because of workqueue_sysfs_unregister(wq) in destory_workqueue().

workqueue_sysfs_unregister() is not simple because it calls device_unregister(), and the code path is long. During reboot I am not sure whether extra deadlocking issue might be introduced. So the safe way is to explicitly call flush_workqueue() firstly to wait for all kwork finished, then destroy it.

It has been ~3 years passed, now I am totally OK with your above change. But could you please test your patch with lockdep enabled, and see whether there is no lock warning observed? Then I'd like to add it into my test directory.


Thanks.

Coly Li




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux