On 05/04/2010 02:45 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
quoted text
>> Hmmm... maybe I'm mistaken but isn't that guaranteed by
>> busiest->active_balance which is protected by the rq lock?
>> active_load_balance_cpu_stop is scheduled iff busiest->active_balance
>> was changed from zero and only active_load_balance_cpu_stop() can
>> clear it at the end of its execution at which point the
>> active_balance_work is safe to reuse.
> 
> Ah, indeed. It wasn't obvious from looking at the patch, but when
> looking at the full code it fairly easy to see.

Hmmm... it's probably worthwhile to note tho.  I'll add a comment and
send out the updated patches soon.

Thanks.

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