[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C4DDE7E.8030406@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 21:14:06 +0200
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Sridhar Samudrala <sri@...ibm.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...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 UPDATED 1/3] vhost: replace vhost_workqueue with per-vhost
kthread
On 07/26/2010 06:51 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 06:14:30PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Just one more thing.
>
> I noticed that with vhost, flush_work was getting the worker
> pointer as well. Can we live with this API change?
Yeah, the flushing mechanism wouldn't work reliably if the work is
queued to a different worker without flushing, so yeah passing in
@worker might actually be better.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists