Hello, Lai.

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:24:02AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> @@ -2295,9 +2285,16 @@ woke_up:
>       if (unlikely(worker->flags & WORKER_DIE)) {
>               spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock);
>               WARN_ON_ONCE(!list_empty(&worker->entry));
> +
> +             /* perform worker self-destruction */
> +             mutex_lock(&pool->manager_mutex);
> +             spin_lock_irq(&pool->lock);
> +             idr_remove(&pool->worker_idr, worker->id);
>               worker->task->flags &= ~PF_WQ_WORKER;
>               /* No one can access to @worker now, free it. */
>               kfree(worker);
> +             spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock);
> +             mutex_unlock(&pool->manager_mutex);

Hmm... is manager_mutex necessary for synchronization with
put_unbound_pool() path?

> @@ -3576,13 +3574,36 @@ static void put_unbound_pool(struct worker_pool *pool)
>        */
>       mutex_lock(&pool->manager_arb);
>       mutex_lock(&pool->manager_mutex);
> -     spin_lock_irq(&pool->lock);
>  
> +     spin_lock_irq(&pool->lock);
>       while ((worker = first_worker(pool)))
>               destroy_worker(worker);
>       WARN_ON(pool->nr_workers || pool->nr_idle);
> -
>       spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock);
> +
> +     /* sync all workers dead */
> +     for_each_pool_worker(worker, wi, pool) {
> +             /*
> +              * Although @worker->task was kicked to die, but we hold
> +              * ->manager_mutex, it can't die, so we get its reference
> +              * before drop ->manager_mutex. And we do sync until it die.
> +              */
> +             get_task_struct(worker->task);
> +
> +             /*
> +              * First, for_each_pool_worker() travels based on ID(@wi),
> +              *   so it is safe even both ->manager_mutex and ->lock
> +              *   are dropped inside the loop.
> +              * Second, no worker can be added now, so the loop
> +              *   ensures to travel all undead workers and sync them dead.
> +              */
> +             mutex_unlock(&pool->manager_mutex);
> +
> +             kthread_stop(worker->task);
> +             put_task_struct(worker->task);
> +             mutex_lock(&pool->manager_mutex);
> +     }

I can't say I'm a fan of the above.  It's icky.  Why can't we do
simple set WORKER_DIE & wakeup thing here?

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/

Reply via email to