From: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com>

From the POV of synchronization, there should be no need to call
wake_up_process() with the 'kthread_create_lock' being held.

Signed-off-by: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---

 kernel/kthread.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff -puN kernel/kthread.c~kthread-call-wake_up_process-without-the-lock-being-held kernel/kthread.c
--- a/kernel/kthread.c~kthread-call-wake_up_process-without-the-lock-being-held
+++ a/kernel/kthread.c
@@ -145,9 +145,9 @@ struct task_struct *kthread_create(int (
 
 	spin_lock(&kthread_create_lock);
 	list_add_tail(&create.list, &kthread_create_list);
-	wake_up_process(kthreadd_task);
 	spin_unlock(&kthread_create_lock);
 
+	wake_up_process(kthreadd_task);
 	wait_for_completion(&create.done);
 
 	if (!IS_ERR(create.result)) {
_