From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753543AbcHPOvY (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:51:24 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f196.google.com ([209.85.161.196]:36589 "EHLO mail-yw0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752021AbcHPOvW (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:51:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:51:20 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Sebastian Reichel Cc: Bhaktipriya Shridhar , Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov , David Woodhouse , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Remove deprecated workqueue interface users Message-ID: <20160816145120.GC9516@htj.duckdns.org> References: <20160815225948.GG3672@mtj.duckdns.org> <20160816002321.ibydaw5qrkpvyx26@earth> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160816002321.ibydaw5qrkpvyx26@earth> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2 (2016-07-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, Sebastian. On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 02:23:21AM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > At least the charger monitoring is timing critical: Many charger > chips must be monitored (e.g. for over-temp. events). I think > all of them have a self-protection, or a watchdog, so they would > actually stop charging instead of overheating, but that may result > in system failure due to power loss. Battery monitors also include > some temperture safety checks. So without careful case-by-case > checking the WQ_MEM_RECLAIM should not be removed IMHO. Thanks for the clarification. Yeah, WQ_MEM_RECLAIM seems like the right call. Thanks. -- tejun