On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 02:07:50AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > when we release gcwq->lock and then grab it, we leave a hole that things > can be changed. > > I don't want to open a hole. if the hole has bug we have to fix it. > if the hole has no bug, we have to add lot of comments to explain it. > > When I write this reply. I am thinking: is the hole has bug if > I release gcwq->lock here? result: no. But I don't want to add all things > what I have thought as comments to explain there is no bug even when we > open a hole. don't leave reviewers too much burden.
We're already releasing gcwq->lock in maybe_create_worker(). That's the reason why @ret is set to true. In addition, we already released the lock to grab manager_mutex. So, you're not adding any burden. Please reuse the busy rebinding mechanism. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
