Hello, Lai. On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 06:07:02PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > The core patch is patch6, it makes all flusher can start and the same time > and allow us do more cleanup. > > Only patch1 and patch6 change the behavior of the code. > All other patches do not change any behavior.
It would have been nice if you described what this patchset tries to achieve how in the head message. I don't see anything wrong with the patchset but flush_workqueue() is quite hairy before this patchset and I'm not sure the situation improves a lot afterwards. The current code is known / verified to work for quite some time and I'd *much* prefer to keep it stable unless it can be vastly simpler. I do like the removal of explicit cascading and would have gone that direction if this code is just being implemented but I'm quite skeptical whether changing over to that now is justifiable. Flush bugs tend to be nasty and often difficult to track down. I'll think more about it. How confident are you about the change? How did you test them? For changes like this, it usually helps a lot to describe how things were tested as part of head and/or commit messages. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
