Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <hidden>
Date: 2012-11-01 20:13:16
Also in:
linux-acpi, lkml
On Thursday, November 01, 2012 01:17:58 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 11:28 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:quoted
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Toshi Kani [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Rafael pointed out in my CPU hot-remove patch that acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() was not exported for modules. Looks like you have the same problem here. FYI, I just sent the following patch that exports acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() and acpi_os_hotplug_execute(). https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/1/225acpi_os_hotplug_execute() does not like having good quality yet. c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 941) /* c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 942) * We can't run hotplug code in keventd_wq/kacpid_wq/kacpid_notify_wq c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 943) * because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions, c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 944) * which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 945) * to flush these workqueues. c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 946) */ c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 947) queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq : c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 948) (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq); 9ac61856 (Bjorn Helgaas 2009-08-31 22:32:10 +0000 949) dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0; bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 950) bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 951) if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq) bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 952) INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred); bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 953) else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq) bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 954) INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred); bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 955) else bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 956) INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred); bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 957) really don't know why checking queue and call same code in every branch. from comm: commit bc73675b99fd9850dd914be01d71af99c5d2a1ae Author: Zhang Rui [off-list ref] Date: Mon Mar 22 15:48:54 2010 +0800 ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep fixes a false alarm from lockdep, as acpi hotplug workqueue waits other workqueues. http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14553 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15521 Original-patch-from: Andrew Morton [off-list ref] Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li [off-list ref] Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui [off-list ref] Signed-off-by: Len Brown [off-list ref]diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c index 8e6d866..900da68 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c@@ -758,7 +758,14 @@ static acpi_status__acpi_os_execute(acpi_execute_type type, queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq : (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq); dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0; - INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred); + + if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq) + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred); + else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq) + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred); + else + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred); + ret = queue_work(queue, &dpc->work); if (!ret) { Len or Rafael, can you just revert that silly patch?Hi Yinghai, Per the following thread, the code seems to be written in this way to allocate a separate lock_class_key for each work queue. It should have had some comment to explain this, though. https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/13/304
The code has evolved since then, however, so that it doesn't make sense any more. Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.