On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 10:59 -0800, Ben Greear wrote: > On 11/17/2010 10:53 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 09:47 +0100, Tejun Heo wrote: > > > >> WQ_NON_REENTRANT doesn't guarantee ordered execution but it guarantees > >> that a single work is not executed concurrently on multiple CPUs. I'm > >> not sure whether this would be safe for the workqueue used by mac80211 > >> but it should let us know whether the workqueue is choked due to a > >> work which is executing for long time. In the long run, if using non > >> reentrant is safe for mac80211, using it would be much better. > > > > No, I don't think it's safe for mac80211. > > So maybe my patch is a good enough way to fix this? Not before we get to the bottom of it, I think, and somebody goes and analyses _all_ the work items that might be there. johannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
