[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 18:43:24 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Revert "task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee"
On 09/09, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Again, rightly or not I believe that FIFO makes task_work_add() more useful.
> > Perhaps I am wrong, so far I can only provide the artificial examples...
>
> I'd rather wait until somebody has a real use case. I hate adding
> infrastructure for "what if.." scenarios. We're better off if we can
> make do with minimal semantics (ie "there are no guarantees except
> that the work will be done before returning to user space") than with
> stronger semantics that people then perhaps start depending on even if
> they didn't really need them.
OK, I see. Thanks.
At least you seem to agree with 1-2, so if Al takes these changes we
can easily reconsider 3/3 later, if/when we have the new user which
needs FIFO.
Oleg.
--
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