On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 03:48:51PM +0800, Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:
> +static int __init lru_init(void)
> +{
> + lru_add_drain_wq = alloc_workqueue("lru-add-drain",
> + WQ_MEM_RECLAIM | WQ_UNBOUND, 0);
Why is it unbound?
> + if (WARN(!lru_add_drain_wq,
> + "Failed to create workqueue lru_add_drain_wq"))
> + return -ENOMEM;
I don't think we need an explicit warn here. Doesn't error return
from an init function trigger boot failure anyway?
> + return 0;
> +}
> +early_initcall(lru_init);
> +
> void lru_add_drain_all(void)
> {
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(lock);
> static struct cpumask has_work;
> int cpu;
>
> + struct workqueue_struct *lru_wq = lru_add_drain_wq ?: system_wq;
> +
> + WARN_ONCE(!lru_add_drain_wq,
> + "Use system_wq to do lru_add_drain_all()");
Ditto. The system is crashing for sure. What's the point of this
warning?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>