lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jul]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: remove the argument @wakeup from worker_set_flags()
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 06:38:26PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 06:09:59PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> > worker_set_flags() doesn't necessarily wake next worker and the @wakeup
> > can be removed, the caller can use the following conbination instead
> > when needed:
> >
> > worker_set_flags();
> > if (need_more_worker(pool))
> > wake_up_worker(pool);
>
> Hmmm, yeah, there were more places where worker_set_flags() was used
> but it does seem excessive now.
>
> > @@ -2045,7 +2032,7 @@ __acquires(&pool->lock)
> > * management. They're the scheduler's responsibility.
> > */
> > if (unlikely(cpu_intensive))
> > - worker_set_flags(worker, WORKER_CPU_INTENSIVE, true);
> > + worker_set_flags(worker, WORKER_CPU_INTENSIVE);
>
> But let's do this separately. Please drop the previous patch and
> perform need_more_worker() test explicitly after setting
> CPU_INTENSIVE.

So, we can do it together at need_more_workers() but let's please
explain how different cases would behave there.

Thanks.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-07-19 01:41    [W:1.033 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site