From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1759347AbbIVSU7 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:20:59 -0400
Received: from mail-yk0-f170.google.com ([209.85.160.170]:36559 "EHLO
	mail-yk0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1759097AbbIVSUz (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:20:55 -0400
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:20:49 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 02/18] kthread: Add create_kthread_worker*()
Message-ID: <20150922182049.GA17659@mtj.duckdns.org>
References: <1442840639-6963-1-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com>
 <1442840639-6963-3-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1442840639-6963-3-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hello, Petr.

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 03:03:43PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> It enforces using kthread_worker_fn() for the main thread. But I doubt
> that there are any plans to create any alternative. In fact, I think
> that we do not want any alternative main thread because it would be
> hard to support consistency with the rest of the kthread worker API.

The original intention was allowing users to use a wrapper function
which sets up kthread attributes and then calls kthread_worker_fn().
That can be done by a work item too but is more cumbersome.  Just
wanted to note that.  Will keep reading on.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun