[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/4] WorkStruct: Separate delayable and non-delayable events.
David Howells wrote:
> Separate delayable work items from non-delayable work items be splitting them
> into a separate structure (dwork_struct), which incorporates a work_struct and
> the timer_list removed from work_struct.
> if (!delay)
> - rc = queue_work(ata_wq, &ap->port_task);
> + rc = queue_dwork(ata_wq, &ap->port_task);
> else
> rc = queue_delayed_work(ata_wq, &ap->port_task, delay);

A consequent (if somewhat silly) name for queue_delayed_work would be
queue_delayed_dwork, since it requires a struct dwork_struct.

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.
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-==- =-== =-=--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-11-20 16:37    [W:0.099 / U:1.336 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site