From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070218214407.GA4229@tv-sign.ru> 
References: <20070218214407.GA4229@tv-sign.ru> 
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>,
       Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] cpufreq_ondemand.c: don't use _WORK_NAR 
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 11:33:47 +0000
Message-ID: <8561.1171884827@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 797
Lines: 18

Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> wrote:

> Looks like dbs_timer() is very careful wrt per_cpu(cpu_dbs_info),
> and it doesn't need the help of WORK_STRUCT_NOAUTOREL.

Actually, I think my problem with this was dbs_info->sample_type, but reading
it again, I'm not sure that it's actually a problem as the work function will
probably not ever be executing on two or more CPUs simultaneously because of
the deferral time involved.

So, your patch is probably fair enough.  Certainly, deletion isn't a problem.

Acked-By: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
-
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/