(2013/01/29 4:49), Tejun Heo wrote: > On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 12:51:37PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >> (2012/12/22 10:57), Tejun Heo wrote: >>> wait_for_kprobe_optimizer() seems largely broken. It uses >>> optimizer_comp which is never re-initialized, so >>> wait_for_kprobe_optimizer() will never wait for anything once >>> kprobe_optimizer() finishes all pending jobs for the first time. >> >> Thank you for fixing that! >> I must misunderstand that the DECLARE_COMPLETION() macro. >> >>> Also, aside from completion, delayed_work_pending() is %false once >>> kprobe_optimizer() starts execution and wait_for_kprobe_optimizer() >>> won't wait for it. >>> >>> Reimplement it so that it flushes optimizing_work until >>> [un]optimizing_lists are empty. Note that this also makes >>> optimizing_work execute immediately if someone's waiting for it, which >>> is the nicer behavior. >> >> I think your enhancement is reasonable and GOOD for me. >> >> Thanks again! >> >> Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu...@hitachi.com> > > Can I take it through workqueue branch w/ other patches?
Yes, of course. I think it is not a critical bug, so I can wait for other patches. Thank you, -- Masami HIRAMATSU IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory E-mail: masami.hiramatsu...@hitachi.com -- 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/
