linux-kernel - Re: block: add blk_run_queue

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]

Message-ID: <20110418202053.GA29394@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:20:53 -0400
From:	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	jaxboe@...ionio.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: block: add blk_run_queue_async

On Mon, Apr 18 2011 at  3:59pm -0400,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 03:55:04PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > +{
> > > + ? ? ? if (likely(!blk_queue_stopped(q)))
> > > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? queue_delayed_work(kblockd_workqueue, &q->delay_work, 0);
> > 
> > I know Jens already queued this up 'for-linus' but why not use
> > kblockd_schedule_work(q, &q->delay_work)?
> 
> I don't see what that would buy us.  If we'd absolutely want a wrapper
> a blk_delay_queue(q, 0) in Jens' current tree would do it now that is
> has been fixed up to use the kblockd workqueue.

Right, I missed 4521cc4 block: blk_delay_queue() should use kblockd
workqueue.  So why not use blk_delay_queue()?

I agree with Jens that it doesn't much matter but I also cannot see it
being a bad thing.. I'd prefer it ;)

*shrug*
--
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/