Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 13:34:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 13:34:39 -0400 Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.102]:24201 "EHLO e2.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 13:34:39 -0400 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 23:15:37 +0530 From: Dipankar Sarma To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] generic work queue handling, workqueue-2.5.39-D6 Message-ID: <20020930231537.A29582@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: dipankar@in.ibm.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from mingo@elte.hu on Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 03:58:25PM +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 937 Lines: 22 On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 03:58:25PM +0000, Ingo Molnar wrote: > it cannot get any simpler than this. Work-queues are SMP-safe and > guarantee serialization of actual work performed. > Ingo, Is it possible that queue_task() handlers in earlier driver code may have depended on implicit serialization against corresponding timer handlers since each of those is run from BHs ? If so, isn't that an issue now with no BHs ? Or, is it safe to assume that general smp-safety code in the drivers will take care of serialization between timers and work-queues ? Thanks -- Dipankar Sarma http://lse.sourceforge.net Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore, India. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/