Markus Thanks for your suggestion,and sorry for my poor wording. On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 4:00 PM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > Flushing own workqueue or work self in work context will lead to > > a deadlock. > > I imagine that the wording “or work self” can become clearer another bit. > > > > Catch this incorrect usage and issue a warning when issue happened > > * Would you like to mark the end of such a sentence with a dot? > > * How do you think about to adjust the repetition of the word “issue”? How about below changelog? workqueue: Warn when work flush own workqueue Flushing itself or own workqueue in work context will lead to a deadlock. Catch this incorrect usage and warning when issue happened. > > > … > > - update comment > > --- > > kernel/workqueue.c | 10 +++++++--- > > I suggest to replace these triple dashes by a blank line. Ok > > > … > > @@ -2585,6 +2585,7 @@ static int rescuer_thread(void *__rescuer) > > * @target_work: work item being flushed (NULL for workqueue flushes) > > * > > * %current is trying to flush the whole @target_wq or @target_work on it. > > + * If a work flushing own workqueue or itself will lead to a deadlock. > > I stumble on understanding challenges for the wording “work flushing”. > Can an adjustment help in comparison to the term “work item”? How about below comment? * If a work item flushing own workqueue or itself will lead to a deadlock. > > Regards, > Markus
