why only one use of "create_freezeable_workqueue"?

why only one use of "create_freezeable_workqueue"?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  hoping to avoid the madness following my earlier, innocuous question
about the lonely, defconfig'ed module scsi_wait_scan.ko, i'm curious
about why there is, in the entire tree, just one invocation of
"create_freezeable_workqueue":

$ grep -rw create_freezeable_workqueue *
drivers/misc/tifm_core.c:       workqueue = create_freezeable_workqueue("tifm");
include/linux/workqueue.h:#define create_freezeable_workqueue(name) __create_workqueue((name), 1, 1)
$

  not that there's anything wrong with that, but i'm just curious as
to why there's only one application of that feature in the whole tree.

rday

-- 
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
========================================================================

Re: why only one use of "create_freezeable_workqueue"?

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Saturday, 19 May 2007 06:09, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> 
>   hoping to avoid the madness following my earlier, innocuous question
> about the lonely, defconfig'ed module scsi_wait_scan.ko, i'm curious
> about why there is, in the entire tree, just one invocation of
> "create_freezeable_workqueue":
> 
> $ grep -rw create_freezeable_workqueue *
> drivers/misc/tifm_core.c:       workqueue = create_freezeable_workqueue("tifm");
> include/linux/workqueue.h:#define create_freezeable_workqueue(name) __create_workqueue((name), 1, 1)
> $
> 
>   not that there's anything wrong with that, but i'm just curious as
> to why there's only one application of that feature in the whole tree.

Because the feature has limitted functionality (signlethread workqueues only),
needs some more work and the use of it is discouraged (for now).

Greetings,
Rafael