On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 05:58:21AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > + if (WARN_ON(pool->nr_workers != pool->nr_idle))
> > > + return;
> >
> > This can be false-negative. we should remove this WARN_ON().
>
> How would the test fail spuriously? Can you please elaborate?
I got it. It'll be s
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 06:08:57PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> > @@ -3185,12 +3250,133 @@ static int init_worker_pool(struct worker_pool
> > *pool)
> > mutex_init(&pool->assoc_mutex);
> > ida_init(&pool->worker_ida);
> >
> > + INIT_HLIST_NODE(&pool->hash_node);
> > + atomic_set(&po
On 02/03/13 11:24, Tejun Heo wrote:
> This patch makes unbound worker_pools reference counted and
> dynamically created and destroyed as workqueues needing them come and
> go. All unbound worker_pools are hashed on unbound_pool_hash which is
> keyed by the content of worker_pool->attrs.
>
> When
This patch makes unbound worker_pools reference counted and
dynamically created and destroyed as workqueues needing them come and
go. All unbound worker_pools are hashed on unbound_pool_hash which is
keyed by the content of worker_pool->attrs.
When an unbound workqueue is allocated, get_unbound_p
4 matches
Mail list logo