Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965079AbVLHA4p (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2005 19:56:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965081AbVLHA4p (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2005 19:56:45 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:25002 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965079AbVLHA4o (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2005 19:56:44 -0500 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 16:58:00 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Christoph Lameter Cc: piggin@cyberone.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] swap migration: Fix lru drain Message-Id: <20051207165800.7f6908df.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: References: <43976FD4.8060404@cyberone.com.au> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.0 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-vine-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 649 Lines: 21 Christoph Lameter wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > Do we need a lock_cpu_hotplug() around here? > > Well, then we may need that lock for each "for_each_online_cpu" use? > I suppose so.. > > Can't this deadlock if 2 CPUs each send work to the other > > Then we would need to fix the workqueue flushing function. I don't think I can see a deadlock here. - 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/