Re: [PATCH] Export current_is_keventd() for libphy

[David Howells]

Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I guess I don't understand exactly what problem the noautorel stuff is
> trying to solve.  It _seems_ to me that in all cases we can simply stuff
> the old `data' field in alongside the controlling work_struct or
> delayed_work which wants to operate on it.

The problem is that you have to be able to guarantee that the data is still
accessible once you clear the pending bit.  The pending bit is your only
guaranteed protection, and once it is clear, the containing structure might be
deallocated.

I would like to be able to get rid of the NAR bit too, but I'm not confident
that in all cases I can.  It'll take a bit more study of the code to be able
to do that.

David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/