Re: [PATCH 16/25] PM / Domains: don't use [delayed_]work_pending()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday, December 25, 2012 09:03:28 AM Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Rafael.
> 
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 12:57:20PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, December 21, 2012 05:57:06 PM Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > There's no need to test whether a (delayed) work item in pending
> > > before queueing, flushing or cancelling it.  Most uses are unnecessary
> > > and quite a few of them are buggy.
> > 
> > Is the particular one you're removing from domain.c buggy?
> 
> It's a bit difficult to tell without understanding the code base but
> from quick glancing it looks like it could be.  The queueing and
> actual excution don't grab the same lock, so there doesn't seem to be
> anything work_pending() returning %true for a work item which already
> started executing.  Even if the bug is there, it's likely to be very
> difficult to trigger tho, so I wouldn't consider it an urgent fix.

OK, so I'd generally prefer changelogs like this:

"There's no need to test whether a (delayed) work item is pending
before queueing, flushing or cancelling it, so remove work_pending()
tests used in those cases."

If that's fine with you, I'll queue up [16/25] and [11/25] for v3.9
with the above as the changelog.

Thanks,
Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/