[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFyX3OgdcWuYQO+YuS3fF_Wt1p8w-G33C5MCkiR-3ncfVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 13:42:36 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] floppy: convert to delayed work and single-thread wq
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:29 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Ummm... still confused. flush_work_sync() is fine too. If you have
> two, two calls to flush_work_sync() are equivalent to flushing the
> workqueue in effect. You just need to avoid flush_workqueue() because
> system workqueues may be hosting work items which can run arbitrarily
> long.
Umm. If there are abritrarily long things and these are serialized,
then that workqueue is not good for putting floppy work on it either,
is it? I don't think you can have it both ways.
Either it's "good enough" for putting floppy_work, fd_timeout and
fd_timer on, or it's not. If it's good enough, then flush_workqueue()
should damn well be timely enough. And if flush_workqueue() isn't
timely enough, then it doesn't sound like system_nrt_wq is the wrong
choice.
Linus
--
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