From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>,
Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] workqueues: Account unbound workqueue in a seperate list
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 11:01:28 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140403150128.GD24119@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140403144826.GE23338@localhost.localdomain>
Hello,
On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 04:48:28PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Wouldn't the right thing to do would be factoring out
> > apply_workqueue_attrs_locked()? It's cleaner to block out addition of
> > new workqueues while the masks are being updated anyway.
>
> I'm not quite sure I get what you suggest. Do you mean have
> apply_workqueue_attrs_locked() calling apply_workqueue_attrs() under
> the lock on this patch?
Not sure it still matters but I was suggesting that creating
apply_workqueue_attrs_locked() which requires the caller to handle
locking and making apply_workqueue_attrs() a wrapper which grabs and
releases lock around it, and using the former in locked iteration
would work. lol has this explanation made it any clearer or is it
even worse now? :)
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-03 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-27 17:20 [PATCH 0/4] workqueue: Control cpu affinity of all unbound workqueues v2 Frederic Weisbecker
2014-03-27 17:20 ` [PATCH 1/4] workqueue: Move workqueue bus attr to device attribute Frederic Weisbecker
2014-04-03 7:09 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-04-24 13:48 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-03-27 17:21 ` [PATCH 2/4] workqueues: Account unbound workqueue in a seperate list Frederic Weisbecker
2014-03-30 12:57 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-03 14:48 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-04-03 15:01 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2014-04-03 15:43 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-03-27 17:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] workqueue: Add anon workqueue sysfs hierarchy Frederic Weisbecker
2014-03-30 13:01 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-03 14:42 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-04-03 14:58 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-03 15:05 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-04-03 7:07 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-03-27 17:21 ` [PATCH 4/4] workqueue: Include ordered workqueues in anon workqueue sysfs interface Frederic Weisbecker
2014-03-31 12:50 ` Lai Jiangshan
2014-03-31 13:15 ` Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-03 15:59 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-04-15 9:58 ` [PATCH] workqueue: allow changing attributions of ordered workqueue Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-15 12:25 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-04-15 15:19 ` Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-23 0:04 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-04-23 2:16 ` Lai Jiangshan
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=20140403150128.GD24119@htj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=bitbucket@online.de \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=khilman@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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
Powered by JetHome