Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754430Ab3CTOBw (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:01:52 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com ([209.85.212.170]:55613 "EHLO mail-wi0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750902Ab3CTOBv (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:01:51 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20130318195136.GG3042@htj.dyndns.org> References: <1363229845-6831-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20130318195136.GG3042@htj.dyndns.org> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 23:01:50 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCHSET wq/for-3.10] workqueue: break up workqueue_lock into multiple locks From: JoonSoo Kim To: Tejun Heo Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1063 Lines: 33 2013/3/19 Tejun Heo : > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 07:57:18PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: >> and available in the following git branch. >> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git review-finer-locking > > Applied to wq/for-3.10. Hello, Tejun. I know I am late, but, please give me a change to ask a question. Finer locking for workqueue code is really needed? Is there a performance issue? I think that there is too many locks and locking rules, although the description about these are very nice. Thanks. > Thanks. > > -- > tejun > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/