[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <i2ld6200be21004232221h2c03ec1alb3d1152142e35fda@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 22:21:34 -0700
From: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dmitri Vorobiev <dmitri.vorobiev@...ial.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] PM: Add suspend blocking work.
2010/4/23 Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>:
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 5:20 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On 04/23, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>>
>>> On 04/23/2010 03:08 AM, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
>>> > Allow work to be queued that will block suspend while it is pending
>>> > or executing. To get the same functionality in the calling code often
>>> > requires a separate suspend_blocker for pending and executing work, or
>>> > additional state and locking.
>>>
>>> Hmm... I think this can be implemented as pure wrapper around
>>> workqueue instead of injecting a flag and code into workqueue core.
>>> Adding @fn field to suspend_blocking_work struct and using a custom
>>> work function to call it and then invoke suspend_unblock() should be
>>> enough, right? Oh, dedicated queue functions will be needed too. I
>>> don't think it's wise to meddle with workqueue core code for this.
>>
>> Completely agreed. The patch adds very "strange" hacks into workqueue
>> code to solve the very specific problems.
>>
>
> I want the suspend blocker active when the work is pending or running.
> I did not see a way to do this on top of the workqueue api without
> adding additional locking.
>
I can remove the WORK_STRUCT_SUSPEND_BLOCKING flag and instead add an
argument to __queue_work and __cancel_work_timer (or use separate
copies) if you think that would be better. It would avoid increasing
the alignment requirement of cpu_workqueue_struct, but it will
probably add more code than the current patch.
--
Arve Hjønnevåg
--
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