On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:46:02AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> It add complexity to other things but not the code. The code is simplified.
How? It can simply repeat kthread_create() until it succeeds with
msleep() inbetween. How can that be more complex than what's
implemented now?
> And
On 07/30/2014 11:23 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Lai.
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 08:32:51AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>>> Why? Just sleep and retry? What's the point of requeueing?
>>
>> Accepted your comments except this one which may need to discuss
>> for an additional round. Requeueing
Hello, Lai.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 08:32:51AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> > Why? Just sleep and retry? What's the point of requeueing?
>
> Accepted your comments except this one which may need to discuss
> for an additional round. Requeueing passes the retry to the
> kthread_worker and
On 07/29/2014 11:04 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 05:16:07PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>
> First of all, the patch is too big. This is a rather pervasive
> change. Please split it up if at all possible.
>
>> +/* Start the mayday timer and the creater when needed
Hello,
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 05:16:07PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
First of all, the patch is too big. This is a rather pervasive
change. Please split it up if at all possible.
> +/* Start the mayday timer and the creater when needed */
> +static inline void start_creater_work(struct
There are some problems with the managers:
1) The last idle worker prefer managing to processing.
It is better that the processing of work items should be the first
priority to make the whole system make progress earlier.
2) each pool always needs an additional idle worker, it is
There are some problems with the managers:
1) The last idle worker prefer managing to processing.
It is better that the processing of work items should be the first
priority to make the whole system make progress earlier.
2) each pool always needs an additional idle worker, it is
Hello,
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 05:16:07PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
First of all, the patch is too big. This is a rather pervasive
change. Please split it up if at all possible.
+/* Start the mayday timer and the creater when needed */
+static inline void start_creater_work(struct
On 07/29/2014 11:04 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello,
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 05:16:07PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
First of all, the patch is too big. This is a rather pervasive
change. Please split it up if at all possible.
+/* Start the mayday timer and the creater when needed */
Hello, Lai.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 08:32:51AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
Why? Just sleep and retry? What's the point of requeueing?
Accepted your comments except this one which may need to discuss
for an additional round. Requeueing passes the retry to the
kthread_worker and gives a
On 07/30/2014 11:23 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello, Lai.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 08:32:51AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
Why? Just sleep and retry? What's the point of requeueing?
Accepted your comments except this one which may need to discuss
for an additional round. Requeueing passes the
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:46:02AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
It add complexity to other things but not the code. The code is simplified.
How? It can simply repeat kthread_create() until it succeeds with
msleep() inbetween. How can that be more complex than what's
implemented now?
And
12 matches
Mail list logo
