[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070516052159.GA967@ff.dom.local>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 07:21:59 +0200
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Gautham Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] make cancel_rearming_delayed_work() reliable
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 02:08:12AM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 05/15, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> >
> > I've overheared somebody is talking about my favorite 2-nd bit!
...
> We already discussed this... Surely, we can do this. I believe
> this will complicate (and _imho_ uglify) the code too much.
Yes, but now I see you are about to change your mind about
this bit...
> May be I am wrong. Please provide a detailed description?
I'll try too look more at your solution - maybe it's "not
so bad". I've probably exaggerated yesterday about this
overhead of setting the VALID bit.
Cheers,
Jarek P.
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists