workqueue: Fix flag collision

PATCH In review Ben Hutchings 2 participants 2 messages Sep 3, 2017 – Sep 5, 2017

Subsystems (2)

Stable branch Workqueue

lore

Share & tools

lore

Ben Hutchings

author

2017-09-03 00:18 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 workqueue: Fix flag collision

Commit 0a94efb5acbb ("workqueue: implicit ordered attribute should be overridable") introduced a __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT flag but gave it the same value as __WQ_LEGACY. I don't believe these were intended to mean the same thing, so renumber __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT.

Fixes 0a94efb5acbb ("workqueue: implicit ordered attribute should be ...")

Signed-off-by Ben Hutchings <[email protected]>

Cc [email protected]

---
 include/linux/workqueue.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

include/linux/workqueue.h +1 -1

index db6dc9dc0482..1c49431f3121 100644
@@ -323,8 +323,8 @@ enum {
 
 	__WQ_DRAINING		= 1 << 16, /* internal: workqueue is draining */
 	__WQ_ORDERED		= 1 << 17, /* internal: workqueue is ordered */
-	__WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT	= 1 << 18, /* internal: alloc_ordered_workqueue() */
 	__WQ_LEGACY		= 1 << 18, /* internal: create*_workqueue() */
+	__WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT	= 1 << 19, /* internal: alloc_ordered_workqueue() */
 
 	WQ_MAX_ACTIVE		= 512,	  /* I like 512, better ideas? */
 	WQ_MAX_UNBOUND_PER_CPU	= 4,	  /* 4 * #cpus for unbound wq */

Tejun Heo

maintainer

2017-09-05 13:34 UTC #1 lore raw

Quoted 8 lines · Ben Hutchings

Commit 0a94efb5acbb ("workqueue: implicit ordered attribute should be overridable") introduced a __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT flag but gave it the same value as __WQ_LEGACY. I don't believe these were intended to mean the same thing, so renumber __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT.
Fixes 0a94efb5acbb ("workqueue: implicit ordered attribute should be ...")
Signed-off-by Ben Hutchings <[email protected]>
Cc [email protected]

Oops, applied to wq/for-4.14.

Thanks.

Signature · 1 line

tejun