On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 11:37:12 -0400
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> This still isn't resilient against two successive calls to update. If
> the second one gets to schedule_work() before the work of the first one
> has finished, you'll corrupt the workqueue.
Sorry, I don't see it. Can you elaborate?
In "run_workqueue(" we do a list_del_init() which resets the
list-pointers of the workitem and only after that reset the
WORK_STRUCT_PENDING member of said structure.
schedule_work does a queue_work_on which does a test_and_set_bit on
the WORK_STRUCT_PENDING member of the work and only queues the work
via list_add_tail in insert_work afterwards.
Where is my think'o? Or was this fixed while you didn't look?
So what _can_ happen, is that we miss a new notfication while the old
notification is still in the queue. But I don't think this is a problem.
Cheers,
Flo
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
