Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752456AbaDCOsc (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2014 10:48:32 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f170.google.com ([74.125.82.170]:64287 "EHLO mail-we0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752217AbaDCOsb (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2014 10:48:31 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 16:48:28 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Tejun Heo Cc: LKML , Christoph Lameter , Kevin Hilman , Mike Galbraith , "Paul E. McKenney" , Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] workqueues: Account unbound workqueue in a seperate list Message-ID: <20140403144826.GE23338@localhost.localdomain> References: <1395940862-31428-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1395940862-31428-3-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <20140330125751.GC8942@htj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140330125751.GC8942@htj.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 08:57:51AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 06:21:00PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > The workqueues are all listed in a global list protected by a big mutex. > > And this big mutex is used in apply_workqueue_attrs() as well. > > > > Now as we plan to implement a directory to control the cpumask of > > all non-ABI unbound workqueues, we want to be able to iterate over all > > unbound workqueues and call apply_workqueue_attrs() for each of > > them with the new cpumask. > > > > But the risk for a deadlock is on the way: we need to iterate the list > > of workqueues under wq_pool_mutex. But then apply_workqueue_attrs() > > itself calls wq_pool_mutex. > > Wouldn't the right thing to do would be factoring out > apply_workqueue_attrs_locked()? It's cleaner to block out addition of > new workqueues while the masks are being updated anyway. I'm not quite sure I get what you suggest. Do you mean have apply_workqueue_attrs_locked() calling apply_workqueue_attrs() under the lock on this patch? Thanks. -- 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/