Message-ID: <42176EC4.8080700@keyaccess.nl>
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 17:52:20 +0100
From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@keyaccess.nl>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8a6) Gecko/20050111
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Roland Dreier <roland@topspin.com>
CC: Vicente Feito <vicente.feito@gmail.com>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: workqueue - process context
References: <200502190148.11334.vicente.feito@gmail.com>	<52is4ptae0.fsf@topspin.com> <42174DD4.9010506@keyaccess.nl> <52acq0ttdg.fsf@topspin.com>
In-Reply-To: <52acq0ttdg.fsf@topspin.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 823
Lines: 20

Roland Dreier wrote:

>     Rene> I have no idea about the module refcounting stuff. Is there
>     Rene> a chance that create_workqueue() could increase a reference
>     Rene> somewhere so that the module wouldn't be allowed to unload
>     Rene> untill after a destroy_workqueue()?
> 
> There's no point to doing this, since it's adding complexity to try
> and avoid a very obvious and easy to find bug.  Other types of
> resource leaks are harder to find, but a module not destroying a
> workqueue is going to be trivial to spot and fix.

Yes, fair enough. Thank you.

Rene.
-
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/