Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754440AbZKHTg1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:36:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754264AbZKHTg1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:36:27 -0500 Received: from e5.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.145]:57744 "EHLO e5.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754290AbZKHTgZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:36:25 -0500 Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:36:33 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Rusty Russell Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Gregory Haskins , Eric Dumazet , netdev@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hpa@zytor.com, s.hetze@linux-ag.com Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 3/3] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server Message-ID: <20091108193633.GL8424@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <200911061531.20299.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <20091106163007.GC6746@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <200911081439.59770.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200911081439.59770.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1215 Lines: 25 On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 02:39:59PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 03:00:07 am Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 03:31:20PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > But it's still nasty to use half an API. If it were a few places I would > > > have open-coded it with a comment, or wrapped it. As it is, I don't think > > > that would be a win. > > > > So would it help to have a rcu_read_lock_workqueue() and > > rcu_read_unlock_workqueue() that checked nesting and whether they were > > actually running in the context of a workqueue item? Or did you have > > something else in mind? Or am I misjudging the level of sarcasm in > > your reply? ;-) > > You read correctly. If we get a second user, creating an API makes sense. Makes sense to me as well. Which does provide some time to come up with a primitive designed to answer the question "Am I currently executing in the context of a workqueue item?". ;-) Thanx, Paul -- 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/