LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: Horms <horms@verge.net.au>, Daniel Drake <dsd@gentoo.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] workqueue: make cancel_rearming_delayed_workqueue() work on idle dwork
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 00:39:27 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070208003927.d8f8cb78.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070208083539.GA85@tv-sign.ru>

On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 11:35:39 +0300 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> wrote:

> On 02/08, Horms wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 08:43:55PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > 
> > > I think we have another problem with delayed_works.
> > > 
> > > cancel_rearming_delayed_workqueue() doesn't garantee that the ->func() is not
> > > running upon return. I don't know if it is bug or not, the comment says nothing
> > > about that.
> > > 
> > > However, we have the callers which seem to assume the opposite, example
> > > 
> > > 	net/ipv4/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c
> > > 
> > > 		module_exit
> > > 		    ip_vs_cleanup
> > > 		        ip_vs_control_cleanup
> > > 		            cancel_rearming_delayed_work
> > > 		// done
> > > 
> > > This is unsafe. The module may be unloaded and the memory may be freed
> > > while defense_work_handler() is still running/preempted.
> > > 
> > > Unless I missed something, which side should be fixed?
> > 
> > Assuming the decision is to fix the ipvs side, is the fix
> > just to remove the call to cancel_rearming_delayed_work() in
> > ip_vs_control_cleanup() ?
> 
> I think ip_vs_control_cleanup() should also do flush_workqueue() after
> cancel_rearming_delayed_work().
> 
> This is ugly, because we have flush_work() but can't use it on delayed
> works. This is possible to change, but not so trivial.
> 
> Andrew, do you think it is worth to tweak delayed works so it would be
> possible to use flush_work(dwork->work) ?
> 

I've completely lost track of what you've been doing in there (this is a
problem) but sure, if the patch isn't too horrid it's always better to be
robust in the core than to have to work around inadequacies in the callers.


  reply	other threads:[~2007-02-08  8:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-02-06 23:30 Oleg Nesterov
2007-02-07 14:33 ` Daniel Drake
2007-02-07 15:16   ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-02-07 17:43     ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-02-08  2:20       ` Horms
2007-02-08  8:35         ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-02-08  8:39           ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2007-02-08  9:46             ` Oleg Nesterov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070208003927.d8f8cb78.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dsd@gentoo.org \
    --cc=horms@verge.net.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 3/6] workqueue: make cancel_rearming_delayed_workqueue() work on idle dwork' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).