Hello, Lai.
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 05:57:12PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> (disorder of execution is OK for current WQ. because we can launch new worker
> to execute the next work if the previous one is waiting something)
>
> But I concern activate-order, not execution order. A non-delayed work
> may delay a delayed work for ever, and if a non-delayed work needs something
> which will be produced by delayed one, the two work may wait each other.
>
> {
> a subsystem queues a work to release resource.
> and them
> a subsystem queues a work to use the resource.
> }
> Is this behavior acceptable?
Even on workqueues with a rescuer, forward progress is not guaranteed
if there are more than one co-dependent work items. workqueue doesn't
guarantee anything regarding activation or execution order and any
user which depends on that is broken.
In general, I think it's a bad idea to give that kind of guarantee and
encourage such usages which can lead to extremely subtle breakages
which cannot be detected in any automated way - we don't have any way
to mark dependencies among work items.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
