Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758230Ab0FOS35 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:29:57 -0400 Received: from hp3.statik.tu-cottbus.de ([141.43.120.68]:40611 "EHLO hp3.statik.tu-cottbus.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754716Ab0FOS34 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:29:56 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 797 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:29:56 EDT Message-ID: <4C17C671.3020605@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 20:29:05 +0200 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100228 SeaMonkey/1.1.19 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tejun Heo CC: mingo@elte.hu, awalls@radix.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jeff@garzik.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, cl@linux-foundation.org, dhowells@redhat.com, arjan@linux.intel.com, johannes@sipsolutions.net, oleg@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] workqueue: concurrency managed workqueue, take#5 References: <1276551467-21246-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <1276551467-21246-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1433 Lines: 34 Tejun Heo wrote: > This is the fifth take of cmwq (concurrency managed workqueue) > patchset. It's on top of v2.6.35-rc3 + sched/core patches. Git tree > is available at > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git review-cmwq A comment and a question: As a driver maintainer, I would find it helpful if the WQ_flags in include/linux/workqueue.h and/or __create_workqueue_key() in kernel/workqueue.c (or its wrappers in include/linux/workqueue.h) were better documented. How about the global workqueue, i.e. schedule_work() and friends? At your current review-cmwq head, they use system_wq, not system_nrt_wq. But doesn't have the present global workqueue WQ_NON_REENTRANT semantics? In fact, don't have _all_ workqueues WQ_NON_REENTRANT semantics presently? If so, a good deal of existing users probably relies on non-reentrant behaviour. Or am I thoroughly misunderstanding the meaning of WQ_NON_REENTRANT? (Sorry if this had been discussed before; I followed the discussions of some of your previous submissions but not all. And PS, I am eagerly awaiting for this to go into the mainline.) -- 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/