Re: [PATCH v2 memstick: support for legacy sony memsticks

[Tejun Heo]

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 09:34:39PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> But this just adds the WQ_UNBOUND. Dunno, without lock I had several
> crashes, that for high level of confidence caused by by parallel
> execution of work items. Once I added this mutex, I couldnt reproduce
> these.

Yes the combination of WQ_UNBOUND and max_active==1 guarantees
strictly ordered one-by-one execution.

> I had the __blk_end_request fail with NULL msb->req. I can't see how
> that can happen if work queue isn't executed in parallel.
> (and then the I didn't even had by mistake the code that sets it to NULL
> in msb_stop, so I really fail to see how that could happen due internal
> bug in my code. 

If you're seeing parallel execution w/ ordered workqueue, it is a
critical bug which would make the kernel crash left and right.  Please
try alloc_ordered_workqueue() and if you still see parallel execution,
please report.

Thanks.

-- 
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/