Hi Thomas,
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:05:23 +0200 (CEST) Thomas Gleixner
wrote:
>
> B1;2802;0cOn Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> > I requested you to include this patch but now am not sure anymore.
> > Looks like there are almost 30 more users which are directly
> > tweaking 'tasklet_st
On 9/22/2016 12:05 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
B1;2802;0cOn Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
I requested you to include this patch but now am not sure anymore.
Looks like there are almost 30 more users which are directly
tweaking 'tasklet_struct' fields and calling other APIs. Hunting t
B1;2802;0cOn Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> I requested you to include this patch but now am not sure anymore.
> Looks like there are almost 30 more users which are directly
> tweaking 'tasklet_struct' fields and calling other APIs. Hunting them
> and fixing them probably would be an
On 9/21/2016 5:42 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
Hello,
On (09/21/16 10:23), Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
[...]
Am assuming one of the driver in your test is using the DECLARE_TASKLET
to init the tasklet and killed by tasklet_kill() which leaves that
tasklet to be still scheduled by tasklet actio
Hello,
On (09/21/16 10:23), Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> > > > tasklet_init() == Init and Enable scheduling
> > [..]
> > > > @@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ void tasklet_init(struct tasklet_struct
> > > > {
> > > > t->next = NULL;
> > > > t->state = 0;
> > > > - atomic_set(&t->count, 0);
On 9/21/2016 1:09 AM, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
didn't look into the issue, but this thing
Thanks for reporting Sergey.
tasklet_init() == Init and Enable scheduling
[..]
@@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ void tasklet_init(struct tasklet_struct
{
t->next = NULL;
t->state = 0;
- atom
didn't look into the issue, but this thing
> > tasklet_init() == Init and Enable scheduling
[..]
> > @@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ void tasklet_init(struct tasklet_struct
> > {
> > t->next = NULL;
> > t->state = 0;
> > - atomic_set(&t->count, 0);
> > + atomic_set(&t->count, 1);
Hello,
On (09/20/16 14:55), a...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
> --
> From: Santosh Shilimkar
> Subject: softirq: fix tasklet_kill() and its users
>
> Semantically the expectation from the tasklet init/kill API should be as
> below.
>
> tasklet_
8 matches
Mail list logo