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/
