Re: [PATCH] swap: remove the struct cpumask has_work

2014-08-01 Thread Frederic Weisbecker
On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 01:16:05PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote: > On 7/31/2014 9:39 PM, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > >On 08/01/2014 12:09 AM, Chris Metcalf wrote: > >>On 7/31/2014 7:51 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > >>>On Thu 31-07-14 11:30:19, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > It is suggested that cpumask_var_t and

Re: [PATCH] swap: remove the struct cpumask has_work

2014-08-01 Thread Chris Metcalf
On 7/31/2014 9:39 PM, Lai Jiangshan wrote: On 08/01/2014 12:09 AM, Chris Metcalf wrote: On 7/31/2014 7:51 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: On Thu 31-07-14 11:30:19, Lai Jiangshan wrote: It is suggested that cpumask_var_t and alloc_cpumask_var() should be used instead of struct cpumask. But I don't wan

Re: [PATCH] swap: remove the struct cpumask has_work

2014-07-31 Thread Lai Jiangshan
On 08/01/2014 12:09 AM, Chris Metcalf wrote: > On 7/31/2014 7:51 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: >> On Thu 31-07-14 11:30:19, Lai Jiangshan wrote: >>> It is suggested that cpumask_var_t and alloc_cpumask_var() should be used >>> instead of struct cpumask. But I don't want to add this complicity nor >>> le

Re: [PATCH] swap: remove the struct cpumask has_work

2014-07-31 Thread Chris Metcalf
On 7/31/2014 7:51 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: On Thu 31-07-14 11:30:19, Lai Jiangshan wrote: It is suggested that cpumask_var_t and alloc_cpumask_var() should be used instead of struct cpumask. But I don't want to add this complicity nor leave this unwelcome "static struct cpumask has_work;", so I

Re: [PATCH] swap: remove the struct cpumask has_work

2014-07-31 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 31-07-14 11:30:19, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > It is suggested that cpumask_var_t and alloc_cpumask_var() should be used > instead of struct cpumask. But I don't want to add this complicity nor > leave this unwelcome "static struct cpumask has_work;", so I just remove > it and use flush_work() t

[PATCH] swap: remove the struct cpumask has_work

2014-07-30 Thread Lai Jiangshan
It is suggested that cpumask_var_t and alloc_cpumask_var() should be used instead of struct cpumask. But I don't want to add this complicity nor leave this unwelcome "static struct cpumask has_work;", so I just remove it and use flush_work() to perform on all online drain_work. flush_work() perfo