On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:15:30AM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> I forgot to add that the semantics of cancellation make it difficult
> to write correct user code. Every cancellation user needs to add
> extra synchronization after the cancel call to handle the case where
> the work is currently executing.
>
> This seems tricky to me and I suspect code using this interface will
> be buggy. How about the following?
> 1. Add a return value indicating that the work is currently executing
> (this still requires the caller to add extra synchronization but is at
> least explicit) versus work is no longer on the list.
> 2. Add a flag to block until the work has been cancelled or completed.
> This is useful to callers who are allowed to block.
>
In Linux kernel you usually have two function cancel() and
cancel_sync(). Second variant waits for work completion.
--
Gleb.
