[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1365440381.25498.22.camel@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 12:59:41 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, axboe@...nel.dk,
Robin Randhawa <robin.randhawa@....com>,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
Patch Tracking <patches@...aro.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
Steve Bannister <Steve.Bannister@....com>, airlied@...hat.com,
Arvind Chauhan <arvind.chauhan@....com>, mingo@...hat.com,
davem@...emloft.net,
Charles Garcia-Tobin <charles.garcia-tobin@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/4] workqueue: Add system wide
system_freezable_unbound_wq
On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 10:55 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 1 April 2013 10:50, Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> >> This patch adds system wide system_freezable_unbound_wq which will be used by
> >> code that currently uses system_freezable_wq and can be moved to unbound
> >> workqueues.
> >
> > _Why_ do i need this change?
>
> Block layer uses system_freezable_wq for some work and to migrate them to a
> UNBOUND wq it was required. Sorry if it is yet not clear.
Looks like Amit was left off the patch 0, and missed the power savings
explanation that you did there. Perhaps you should have included that in
each patch change log.
-- Steve
--
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