[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5bb93b2b-e59c-a7d6-b638-f12463b0bc04@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2021 23:53:53 +0900
From: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
jwi@...ux.ibm.com, kgraul@...ux.ibm.com, hca@...ux.ibm.com,
gor@...ux.ibm.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com,
Marek Lindner <mareklindner@...mailbox.ch>,
sw@...onwunderlich.de, a@...table.cc, sven@...fation.org,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
dsahern@...nel.org, ap420073@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/7] mld: add a new delayed_work,
mc_delrec_work
>
> By the way, if you do not use a delay, you can just use regular work.
>
The regular workqueue API couldn't be used in an atomic context, So I
used delayed_work.
If 0 delay is passed to delayed_work, it internally calls regular workqueue.
So, I think there is no actual difference.
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists