Hello, Peter.
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 10:05:53AM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
> Given your concerns about the performance impact, maybe we should
> ask Fengguang to run this change through his automated test suites
> to find out what the perf delta is?
It should be fine. It's more like I just didn
On 02/22/2014 09:40 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 07:11:51AM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
Users of the workqueue api may assume the workqueue provides a
memory ordering guarantee for re-queued work items; ie., that
if a work item is not queue-able then the previously queued
work ins
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 07:11:51AM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
> Users of the workqueue api may assume the workqueue provides a
> memory ordering guarantee for re-queued work items; ie., that
> if a work item is not queue-able then the previously queued
> work instance is not running and so any memo
Users of the workqueue api may assume the workqueue provides a
memory ordering guarantee for re-queued work items; ie., that
if a work item is not queue-able then the previously queued
work instance is not running and so any memory operations
which occur before queuing the work will be visible to t
4 matches
Mail list logo
