[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=aKLhtuuMtd=KZ8YBykCp=yJ-KPAJ3jKQq0jQW@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:02:48 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ext4 update for 2.6.39-rc1
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
>
> Please pull from:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4.git for_linus
>
> to get the ext4 updates for the 2.6.39 merge window.
Ok, guys, can you verify my merge? In one branch, we had Tejun change
it to use "alloc_workqueue()", and in another, ext4 switched from
create_workqueue() to create_singlethread_workqueue().
My resolution was to use WQ_UNBOUND in allow_workqueue() in the
resulting merge, which I think should be semantically the correct
resolve. But the commit message in the create_singlethread_workqueue()
change seems to imply that the single-threadedness isn't a
_correctness_ issue as much as it is just a "we don't need multiple
threads" issue, so maybe the WQ_UNBOUND isn't necessary. So WQ_UNBOUND
may or may not be a good idea.
Regardless, please give it a look, ok?
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists