On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 07:18:26PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean? Do you mean trying to limit
> work_current_func() to only be accessible to the async code? You'd
> have to make some kind of private header file under kernel/ for that,
> but I guess that woul
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> Another thing is that it seems like having introspection type
> interface often lead to abuses - work_pending(), work_busy() both
> ended up bringing more unnecessary dependencies and subtle bugginess
> on internal details than actual benefits.
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 06:59:36PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> I'd prefer to keep struct worker inside workqueue.c, so how about
> keeping the workqueue part and make async part current_is_async()?
Another thing is that it seems like having introspection type
interface often lead to abuses - work_pe
Hello, Linus.
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 06:47:48PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Implement work/async_current_func() which query whether the current
> > task is a workqueue or async worker respectively and, if so, return
> > the current functio
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Implement work/async_current_func() which query whether the current
> task is a workqueue or async worker respectively and, if so, return
> the current function being executed along with work / async item
> related information.
So why the odd in
Implement work/async_current_func() which query whether the current
task is a workqueue or async worker respectively and, if so, return
the current function being executed along with work / async item
related information.
This will be used to implement warning on synchronous request_module()
from
6 matches
Mail list logo
