Re: Filesystem lockup with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT

[Austin Schuh]

On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Austin Schuh wrote:
>> I think I might have an answer for my own question, but I would
>> appreciate someone else to double check.  If list_empty erroneously
>> returns that there is work to do when there isn't work to do, we wake
>> up an extra worker which then goes back to sleep.  Not a big loss.  If
>> list_empty erroneously returns that there isn't work to do when there
>> is, this should only be because someone is modifying the work list.
>> When they finish, as far as I can tell, all callers then check to see
>> if a worker needs to be started up, and start one.
>
> Precisely.

A comment there when you put together a polished patch for inclusion
would be awesome.  I'm assuming that you will put the patch together?
--
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/