Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 13 Dec 2018 16:03:58 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc:     Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        tglx@linutronix.de, tj@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] srcu: Remove srcu_queue_delayed_work_on()
Message-ID: <20181213150358.bgrwgpp5am5w53ie@linutronix.de>
References: <20181211111238.13474-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
 <20181212014016.GA97542@google.com>
 <20181212140519.GA10937@tardis>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181212140519.GA10937@tardis>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2018-12-12 22:05:19 [+0800], Boqun Feng wrote:
> So Jiangshan and TJ, what's your opion on this one? If we call a
> queue_work_on() at a place where that target cpu may be offlined, I
> think we have the guarantee that the work will be eventually executed
> even if the cpu is never online again, right? In other words, if a cpu
> has been online once, queue_work_on() on it will be free from racing
> with cpu hotplug.
> 
> Am I right about this, or did I miss something subtle?

tj answered this one:
  https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180919205521.GE902964@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com

> Regards,
> Boqun

Sebastian