Messages in this thread | | | From | David Howells <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/4] WorkStruct: Separate delayable and non-delayable events. | Date | Mon, 20 Nov 2006 15:43:01 +0000 |
| |
Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> wrote:
> A consequent (if somewhat silly) name for queue_delayed_work would be > queue_delayed_dwork, since it requires a struct dwork_struct.
Yeah... Sometimes I wish C has type-based function overloading like C++ does.
> Are there many or frequent usages of "undelayed delayable work" like > above, where runtime decides if a delay is necessary? If not, > queue_dwork could be removed from the API and queue_(delayed_|d)work be > called with delay=0.
There are a few, but not many. Your suggestion is a good one, I think. queue_delayed_work() can just devolve to queue_work() if delay == 0.
David - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |