Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1317224
| From | Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 10/22] kthread: Allow to modify delayed kthread work |
| Date | 2016-01-25 20:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qUUQa-cl-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qURyW-64A-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <qURyW-64A-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:44:59PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> +bool mod_delayed_kthread_work(struct kthread_worker *worker,
> + struct delayed_kthread_work *dwork,
> + unsigned long delay)
> +{
> + struct kthread_work *work = &dwork->work;
> + unsigned long flags;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> +try_again:
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&worker->lock, flags);
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(work->worker && work->worker != worker);
> +
> + if (work->canceling)
> + goto out;
> +
> + ret = try_to_cancel_kthread_work(work, &worker->lock, &flags);
> + if (ret == -EAGAIN)
> + goto try_again;
> +
> + if (work->canceling)
Does this test need to be repeated? How would ->canceling change
while worker->lock is held?
Thanks.
--
tejun
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v4 10/22] kthread: Allow to modify delayed kthread work Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> - 2016-01-25 16:50 +0100 Re: [PATCH v4 10/22] kthread: Allow to modify delayed kthread work Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-01-25 20:20 +0100
csiph-web