Re: [PATCH 19/21] workqueue: introduce worker

[Tejun Heo]

Hello,

11/17/2009 08:51 PM, Louis Rilling wrote:
>>> +static struct worker *create_worker(struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq, bool bind)
>>> +{
>>> +	int id = -1;
>>> +	struct worker *worker = NULL;
>>> +
>>> +	spin_lock(&workqueue_lock);
>>> +	while (ida_get_new(&per_cpu(worker_ida, cwq->cpu), &id)) {
>>> +		spin_unlock_irq(&workqueue_lock);
>>> +		if (!ida_pre_get(&per_cpu(worker_ida, cwq->cpu), GFP_KERNEL))
>>> +			goto fail;
>>> +		spin_lock(&workqueue_lock);
>>> +	}
>>> +	spin_unlock_irq(&workqueue_lock);
>>> +
>>> +	worker = alloc_worker();
>>> +	if (!worker)
>>> +		goto fail;
>>> +
>>> +	worker->cwq = cwq;
>>> +	worker->id = id;
>>> +
>>> +	worker->task = kthread_create(worker_thread, worker, "kworker/%u:%d",
>>> +				      cwq->cpu, id);
>>> +	if (IS_ERR(worker->task))
>>> +		goto fail;
>>> +
>>> +	if (bind)
>>> +		kthread_bind(worker->task, cwq->cpu);
>>> +
>>> +	return worker;
>>> +fail:
>>> +	if (id >= 0) {
>>> +		spin_lock(&workqueue_lock);
>>> +		ida_remove(&per_cpu(worker_ida, cwq->cpu), id);
>>> +		spin_unlock_irq(&workqueue_lock);
>>> +	}
>>> +	kfree(worker);
>>> +	return NULL;
>>> +}
>>
>> AFAIU create_worker() should call spin_lock_irq() instead of spin_lock().
> 
> spin_unlock() instead of spin_unlock_irq() looks better in fact ;).

Oooh... right, thanks for spotting that.  I'll fix it up.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/