On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 09:38:39PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello, Lai. > > > > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 03:10:20PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > >> 1) complete() can't be called inside attach_mutex due to the worker > >> shouldn't access to the pool after complete(). > > > > Sure, complete it after releasing the lock. Shutdown can't complete > > before the completion gets completed, right? > > > >> 2) put_unbound_pool() may called from get_unbound_pool(), we need to add > >> an additional check and avoid the wait_for_completion() if so. > > Do you accept if I remove put_unbound_pool() from get_unbound_pool() > and use several freeing code instead?
Hah? How much extra complexity are we talking about? It's a single if, no? -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
