On 06/03/13 09:34, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:33:27PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote: >> Hello, Ryan. >> >> On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 09:29:35AM +1100, Ryan Mallon wrote: >>>> @@ -148,6 +148,8 @@ struct worker_pool { >>>> struct mutex assoc_mutex; /* protect POOL_DISASSOCIATED */ >>>> struct ida worker_ida; /* L: for worker IDs */ >>>> >>>> + struct workqueue_attrs *attrs; /* I: worker attributes */ >>> >>> If attrs always exists, why not just embed the struct and avoid the >>> need to alloc/free it? >> >> Because then it'll need a separate init paths for embedded ones. If >> the field was in any way hot, I'd have embedded it but it isn't and >> it's just less code to share the alloc path. > > Ooh, right, and that cpumask_t is going away and you can't statically > allocate cpumask_var_t, so it needs an allocation and error check from > it anyway.
Not sure I follow. I mean drop the pointer, eg: struct workqueue_attr attrs; Since, at least in this patch, struct worker_pool appears to always alloc the attrs field. You do still of course need the cpumask_t initialisation. Am I missing something? ~Ryan -- 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/