[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140512210811.GB18959@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 17:08:11 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10 V2] workqueue: destroy_worker() should destroy idle
workers only
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 02:56:14PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> @@ -1692,9 +1691,8 @@ static struct worker *alloc_worker(void)
> * create_worker - create a new workqueue worker
> * @pool: pool the new worker will belong to
> *
> - * Create a new worker which is bound to @pool. The returned worker
> - * can be started by calling start_worker() or destroyed using
> - * destroy_worker().
> + * Create a new worker which is attached to @pool.
> + * The new worker must be started and enter idle via start_worker().
Please always fill the comment paragarphs to 75 column or so. Also,
do we even need start_worker() separate anymore? Maybe we can just
fold alloc_and_create_worker() into alloc_worker()?
> @@ -1815,6 +1812,7 @@ static int create_and_start_worker(struct worker_pool *pool)
> * @worker: worker to be destroyed
> *
> * Destroy @worker and adjust @pool stats accordingly.
> + * The worker should be idle.
Ditto about filling.
Looks good otherwise.
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