From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Dave Peterson <dsp@llnl.gov>
Cc: dthompson@lnxi.com, arjan@infradead.org,
bluesmoke-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, hch@lst.de,
alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/15] EDAC: switch to kthread_ API
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 16:03:58 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060303160358.57197d23.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200603031520.29855.dsp@llnl.gov>
Dave Peterson <dsp@llnl.gov> wrote:
>
> On Friday 03 March 2006 07:57, Doug Thompson wrote:
> > Currently the timer event code performs two operations:
> >
> > 1) ECC polling and
> > 2) PCI parity polling.
> >
> > I want to split those from each other, so each can have a seperate cycle
> > rate (also adding a sysfs cycle control for the PCI parity timing in
> > addition to the existing ECC cycle control).
>
> Yes, this sounds like a good idea. Using schedule_delayed_work() to
> independently implement each polling cycle, we should be able to get
> rid of the EDAC kernel thread.
That would suit. One needs to be quite careful about killing everything
off in the close->rmmod side of things, especially if the delayed work
handler re-arms itself. We have a pending (and possibly executing) timer
handler to worry about, then a pending (and possibly executing) keventd
handler to worry about.
We've got this cancel_rearming_delayed_work() thing - I was never terribly
happy about it, but I think it works.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-04 0:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-03 15:57 Doug Thompson
2006-03-03 23:20 ` Dave Peterson
2006-03-04 0:03 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-03-03 1:47 Dave Peterson
2006-03-03 2:30 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-03 9:16 ` Arjan van de Ven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060303160358.57197d23.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=bluesmoke-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=dsp@llnl.gov \
--cc=dthompson@lnxi.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®