Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 20:43:55 +0300
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
To: Daniel Drake <dsd@gentoo.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
       Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] workqueue: make cancel_rearming_delayed_workqueue() work on idle dwork
Message-ID: <20070207174355.GA340@tv-sign.ru>
References: <20070206233016.GA108@tv-sign.ru> <45C9E320.3070001@gentoo.org> <20070207151630.GA138@tv-sign.ru>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070207151630.GA138@tv-sign.ru>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1096
Lines: 38

On 02/07, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> 
> The following code
> 
> 	schedule_delayed_work(dw);
> 	cancel_rearming_delayed_workqueue(dw);	// OK
> 	cancel_rearming_delayed_workqueue(dw);	// HANGS!
> 
> still doesn't work.

I think we have another problem with delayed_works.

cancel_rearming_delayed_workqueue() doesn't garantee that the ->func() is not
running upon return. I don't know if it is bug or not, the comment says nothing
about that.

However, we have the callers which seem to assume the opposite, example

	net/ipv4/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c

		module_exit
		    ip_vs_cleanup
		        ip_vs_control_cleanup
		            cancel_rearming_delayed_work
		// done

This is unsafe. The module may be unloaded and the memory may be freed
while defense_work_handler() is still running/preempted.

Unless I missed something, which side should be fixed?

Oleg.

-
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/