Hello,
2017-05-24 22:21 GMT+02:00 Tejun Heo :
> Hello,
>
> cc'ing ACPI folks.
>
> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:16:02PM +0200, Alex Naidis wrote:
>> 2017-05-24 22:01 GMT+02:00 Tejun Heo :
>> > Hello, Alex.
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 09:58:19PM +0200, Alex Naidis wrote:
>> >> Yeah, I agree, it
Hello,
cc'ing ACPI folks.
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:16:02PM +0200, Alex Naidis wrote:
> 2017-05-24 22:01 GMT+02:00 Tejun Heo :
> > Hello, Alex.
> >
> > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 09:58:19PM +0200, Alex Naidis wrote:
> >> Yeah, I agree, it is wrong to rely on work_busy() providing correct data.
> >>
Hello,
2017-05-24 22:01 GMT+02:00 Tejun Heo :
> Hello, Alex.
>
> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 09:58:19PM +0200, Alex Naidis wrote:
>> Yeah, I agree, it is wrong to rely on work_busy() providing correct data.
>> However sometimes it is useful to have an indicator like this to at least
>> catch some case
Hello, Alex.
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 09:58:19PM +0200, Alex Naidis wrote:
> Yeah, I agree, it is wrong to rely on work_busy() providing correct data.
> However sometimes it is useful to have an indicator like this to at least
> catch some cases where requeuing work would be obsolete.
> This applie
Hello,
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 01:34:53AM +0200, Alex Naidis wrote:
> This implements a variant of work_busy() for
> delayed work.
>
> CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Alex Naidis
> ---
> include/linux/workqueue.h | 1 +
> kernel/workqueue.c| 9 +
> 2 files chan
5 matches
Mail list logo
