Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756022Ab0ATCDY (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:03:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755408Ab0ATCDP (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:03:15 -0500 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:53095 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754881Ab0ATCDM (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:03:12 -0500 Message-ID: <4B566590.5030804@kernel.org> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:08:16 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091130 SUSE/3.0.0-1.1.1 Thunderbird/3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arjan van de Ven CC: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu, peterz@infradead.org, awalls@radix.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jeff@garzik.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, cl@linux-foundation.org, dhowells@redhat.com, avi@redhat.com, johannes@sipsolutions.net, andi@firstfloor.org, Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: [PATCH 32/40] async: introduce workqueue based alternative implementation References: <1263776272-382-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1263776272-382-33-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20100117220130.214d56f1@linux.intel.com> <4B5420A3.3080200@kernel.org> <20100118072523.2683cd59@linux.intel.com> <4B55038D.3070106@kernel.org> <4B550384.8030103@linux.intel.com> <4B5565BE.4050406@kernel.org> <20100119063718.3f1f39cc@linux.intel.com> <4B564C23.1030708@kernel.org> <4B564ECC.9080707@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <4B564ECC.9080707@linux.intel.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (hera.kernel.org [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 02:02:09 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1175 Lines: 32 Hello, On 01/20/2010 09:31 AM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On 1/19/2010 16:19, Tejun Heo wrote: > >> Yeah, you can flush individual works from other works and wqs from >> works running from different wqs. What's not allowed is flushing the >> wq a work is running on from the work. Let's say if the flush code >> can be modified to do so, would that change your opinion? > > once you get "run in parallel, but have an API to wait on everyone > who was scheduled before me"... ... that'd be fine ;) Cool, I'll give a shot at it then. I think it would be better to adapt the existing interface to the new uses if at all possible. > but then you pretty much HAVE the cookie API, even if you don't have > an actual cookie. (just the cookie was an easy way to determine the > "before me") Yeap, but then again, whatever we do, all those synchronization interfaces can be mapped onto each other eventually. 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/