Hi Tejun,

On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:12:33 -0700 Tejun Heo [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 01:19:38PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

quoted

@@@ -456,40 -462,30 +462,30 @@@ static int worker_pool_assign_id(struc
  {
  	int ret;
  
- 	mutex_lock(&worker_pool_idr_mutex);
- 	ret = idr_alloc(&worker_pool_idr, pool, 0, 0, GFP_KERNEL);
- 	if (ret >= 0)
- 		pool->id = ret;
- 	mutex_unlock(&worker_pool_idr_mutex);
+ 	lockdep_assert_held(&wq_mutex);
+ 
+ 	do {
 -		if (!idr_pre_get(&worker_pool_idr, GFP_KERNEL))
 -			return -ENOMEM;
 -		ret = idr_get_new(&worker_pool_idr, pool, &pool->id);
++		ret = idr_alloc(&worker_pool_idr, pool, 0, 0, GFP_KERNEL);
++		if (ret >= 0)
++			pool->id = ret;
+ 	} while (ret == -EAGAIN);
  
 -	return ret;
 +	return ret < 0 ? ret : 0;

We don't need the loop anymore, so it should look like

  static int worker_pool_assign_id(struct worker_pool *pool)
  {
	  int ret;

	  lockdep_assert_held(&wq_mutex);

	  ret = idr_alloc(&worker_pool_idr, pool, 0, 0, GFP_KERNEL);
	  if (ret >= 0) {
		  pool->id = ret;
		  return 0;
	  }
	  return ret;
  }

Anyways, I pulled master into wq/for-next and resolved it there, so it
shouldn't cause you any more trouble.

Ah, OK, thanks.   One small point, when you do a back merge like that,
you should always put an explanation in the commit message for the merge.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au