On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:40:15PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> +static void wq_unbound_install_ctx_free(struct wq_unbound_install_ctx *ctx)
Maybe naminig it more consistently with apply_workqueue_attrs() is
better? apply_wqattrs_cleanup()?
> {
> + int node;
> +
> + if (ctx) {
> +
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:40:15PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
+static void wq_unbound_install_ctx_free(struct wq_unbound_install_ctx *ctx)
Maybe naminig it more consistently with apply_workqueue_attrs() is
better? apply_wqattrs_cleanup()?
{
+ int node;
+
+ if (ctx) {
+
Current apply_workqueue_attrs() includes pwqs-allocation and pwqs-installation,
so when we batch multiple apply_workqueue_attrs()s as a transaction, we can't
ensure the transaction must succeed or fail as a complete unit.
To solve this, we split apply_workqueue_attrs() into three stages.
The
Current apply_workqueue_attrs() includes pwqs-allocation and pwqs-installation,
so when we batch multiple apply_workqueue_attrs()s as a transaction, we can't
ensure the transaction must succeed or fail as a complete unit.
To solve this, we split apply_workqueue_attrs() into three stages.
The
4 matches
Mail list logo
