[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150922183006.GC17659@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:30:06 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 04/18] kthread: Add destroy_kthread_worker()
Hello,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 03:03:45PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
...
> Note that flush() does not guarantee that the queue is empty. drain()
> is more safe. It returns when the queue is really empty. Also it warns
Maybe it'd be better to be a bit more specific. drain() is safer
because it can handle self-requeueing work items.
> when too many work is being queued when draining.
...
> +/**
> + * destroy_kthread_worker - destroy a kthread worker
> + * @worker: worker to be destroyed
> + *
> + * Destroy @worker. It should be idle when this is called.
So, no new work item should be queued from this point on but @worker
is allowed to be not idle.
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