On 2022/03/30 11:29, Dominique Martinet wrote: > Tetsuo Handa wrote on Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 10:57:15AM +0900: >>>> Please don't use schedule_work() if you need to use flush_scheduled_work(). >>> >>> In this case we don't call flush_scheduled_work -- ext4 does. >> >> Yes, that's why I changed recipients to ext4 people. > > Sorry, I hadn't noticed. > 9p is the one calling schedule_work, so ultimately it really is the > combinaison of the two, and not just ext4 that's wrong here. Calling schedule_work() itself does not cause troubles (unless there are too many pending works to make progress). Calling flush_scheduled_work() causes troubles because it waits for completion of all works even if some of works cannot be completed due to locks held by the caller of flush_scheduled_work(). 9p is innocent for this report.
