On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 02:56:36PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> We don't need to wake up regular worker when nr_running==1,
> so need_more_worker() is sufficient here.
>
> And need_more_worker() gives us better readability due to the name of
> "keep_working()" implies the rescuer should keep
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 02:56:36PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
We don't need to wake up regular worker when nr_running==1,
so need_more_worker() is sufficient here.
And need_more_worker() gives us better readability due to the name of
keep_working() implies the rescuer should keep working
We don't need to wake up regular worker when nr_running==1,
so need_more_worker() is sufficient here.
And need_more_worker() gives us better readability due to the name of
"keep_working()" implies the rescuer should keep working now but
the rescuer is actually leaving.
Signed-off-by: Lai
We don't need to wake up regular worker when nr_running==1,
so need_more_worker() is sufficient here.
And need_more_worker() gives us better readability due to the name of
keep_working() implies the rescuer should keep working now but
the rescuer is actually leaving.
Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan
4 matches
Mail list logo
