On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 01:27:55PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> changing pwq:
> install pwq
> lock(pool->lock)
> put_pwq();
> unlock(pool->lock)
>
> __queue_work():
> lock(pool->lock)
> test ref and find it zero;
> see the installation here;
> it is
On 05/26/2014 12:23 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:21:25PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> This is not busy wait, the retry and numa_pwq_tbl() guarantee that
>> the retry will get a new pwq (even without cpu_relax()) as the com
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:21:25PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> This is not busy wait, the retry and numa_pwq_tbl() guarantee that
> the retry will get a new pwq (even without cpu_relax()) as the comments says,
Yes, *eventually*. It's not guar
On 05/22/2014 10:21 PM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 04:44:16PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>>> When pwq->refcnt == 0, the retrying is guaranteed to make forward-progress.
>>> The comment above the code explains it well:
>>>
>>
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 04:44:16PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> When pwq->refcnt == 0, the retrying is guaranteed to make forward-progress.
>> The comment above the code explains it well:
>>
>> /*
>>* pwq is determined and locked.
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 04:44:16PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> When pwq->refcnt == 0, the retrying is guaranteed to make forward-progress.
> The comment above the code explains it well:
>
> /*
>* pwq is determined and locked. For unbound pools, we could have
>* raced with
6 matches
Mail list logo
