Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762277AbXHLIMN (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Aug 2007 04:12:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756248AbXHLIMA (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Aug 2007 04:12:00 -0400 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:33558 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752943AbXHLIL7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Aug 2007 04:11:59 -0400 X-Envelope-From: stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de Message-ID: <46BEC0AD.7080202@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 10:11:25 +0200 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.6) Gecko/20070807 SeaMonkey/1.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: When to use a freezeable workqueue? X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 578 Lines: 17 In which situations is create_freezeable_workqueue() to be preferred over create_singlethread_workqueue()? Is a freezable worqueue preferable whenever the worker thread /can/ be frozen, or is it only to be used if the thread /must/ be frozen during suspend? Thanks, -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== =--- -==-- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - 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/