Jarek Poplawski wrote:
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 11:40:32PM -0800, Ben Greear wrote:
...
Maybe there should be something like an ASSERT_NOT_RTNL() in the
flush_scheduled_work()
method? If it's performance criticial, #ifdef it out if we're not
debugging locks?
Yes! I thought about the same (at first). But in my
opinion it was not enough, so I thought about doing
this in flush_workqueue. But in my next opinion it
was not enough too. Now I think something like this
should be done in rtnl_lock (under some debugging #if
of course).
The reason these bugs have been hidden is that most of the time, there
is nothing
on the pending work queue that will try to grab RTNL. But, the
flush_work_queue
is still called with RTNL held, so an assert would find this much
earlier than
waiting for someone to get lucky and actually catch (and debug and report)
a deadlock...
I don't see how asserting it in the rtnl_lock would help anything,
because at that
point we are about to deadlock anyway... (and this is probably very
rare, as mentioned above.)
Thanks,
Ben
Cheers,
Jarek P.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Ben Greear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
