linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 32/40] async: introduce workqueue based alternative implementation

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:	Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:31:08 -0800
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu, peterz@...radead.org,
	awalls@...ix.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeff@...zik.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com, avi@...hat.com, johannes@...solutions.net,
	andi@...stfloor.org, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 32/40] async: introduce workqueue based alternative implementation

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 ;)

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")
--
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/