From ec552ece1f25e8ecadf0afafe87ce314d13dc3e7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ben Hutchings Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2017 01:18:41 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] workqueue: Fix flag collision commit fbf1c41fc0f4d3574ac2377245efd666c1fa3075 upstream. 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 Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- include/linux/workqueue.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/include/linux/workqueue.h b/include/linux/workqueue.h index 733a21ef8da4..1061add575d2 100644 --- a/include/linux/workqueue.h +++ b/include/linux/workqueue.h @@ -311,8 +311,8 @@ 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 */