[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140507131523.GC16702@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 09:15:23 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] workqueue: async worker destruction
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 03:30:39PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On 04/27/2014 12:08 PM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>
> >
> > spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock);
> > +
> > + wait_event_cmd(pool->workers_unbound,
> > + idr_is_empty(&pool->worker_idr),
> > + mutex_unlock(&pool->manager_mutex),
> > + mutex_lock(&pool->manager_mutex));
> > +
>
>
> How about I wrap it as wait_event_mutex()?
> (like wait_event_lock_irq() in kernel and pthread_cond_wait() in userspace)
waitq tends to be trickier to get right. Can you please give
completion a shot? completion is pretty convenient for (its only
purpose after all) this sort of one-shot synchronizations.
--
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