From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752513AbaDQPaC (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2014 11:30:02 -0400 Received: from mail-qg0-f49.google.com ([209.85.192.49]:57347 "EHLO mail-qg0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752242AbaDQP3i (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2014 11:29:38 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 11:29:32 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Lai Jiangshan Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: add __WQ_FREEZING and remove POOL_FREEZING Message-ID: <20140417152932.GN15326@htj.dyndns.org> References: <20130421012925.GA19097@mtj.dyndns.org> <1395741364-19489-1-git-send-email-laijs@cn.fujitsu.com> <20140416195109.GD22569@htj.dyndns.org> <534F193F.2070600@cn.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <534F193F.2070600@cn.fujitsu.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 07:58:55AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > > Why are we removing the above? Can't we still test __WQ_FREEZING as > > we're holding wq->mutex? I don't really mind removing the > > optimization but the patch description at least has to explain what's > > going on. > > This part was in other old patch: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/3/756 > I admit the changelogs(old patch&this) are bad. > But I still consider it would be better if we split it to two patches: > (https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/3/748 & https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/3/756) > > There are different aims in the patches. > > Any thinks? And sorry for I didn't keep to push the patches at that time. Yeah, I think I like the changes. Please split them and send with proper descriptions. Thanks. -- tejun