On 04/23, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 5:20 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > The unblock code in run_workqueue() is racy, > > it can unblock after the work was queued on another CPU, cwq->lock can't > > help. > > If the work is both queued and starts running on another workqueue > between "get_wq_data(work) == cwq" and "!work_pending(work)", then > suspend_unblock will be called when it shouldn't. It should work fine > if I change to it check pending first though, since it cannot move > back to the current workqueue without locking cwq->lock first. It can be queued on the same or different workqueue on another CPU, right before run_workqueue() does unblock. But I guess this doesn't matter. You already discussed this all with Tejun while I was sleeping ;) And I agree very much, the new plan looks much better imho. Oleg. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
