linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 45/51] writeback: implement wb_wait_for_single

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 1 Jul 2015 23:07:23 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	axboe@...nel.dk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
	hannes@...xchg.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	vgoyal@...hat.com, lizefan@...wei.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, mhocko@...e.cz, clm@...com,
	fengguang.wu@...el.com, david@...morbit.com, gthelen@...gle.com,
	khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH 45/51] writeback: implement wb_wait_for_single_work()

Hello,

On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 09:07:35PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> I don't understand, why is the special handling with single_wait,
> single_done necessary. When we fail to allocate work and thus use the
> base_work for submission, we can still use the standard completion mechanism
> to wait for work to finish, can't we?

Indeed.  I'm not sure why I didn't do that.  I'll try.

> BTW: Again it would be easier for me to review this if the implementation
> of this function was in one patch with the use of it so that one can see
> how it gets used...

Same point on this one as before.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/