lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 5/9] usb: don't use PREPARE_DELAYED_WORK
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014, Tejun Heo wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 10:14:48AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > Is the cancel_delayed_work_sync(&hub->init_work) call in hub_quiesce()
> > going to get confused by all this?
>
> Yeah, you can't cancel a work item which hasn't been initialzed.
> Maybe move init of the first work function there? I don't think it
> really matters tho.
>
> > It's worth mentioning that the only reason for the hub_init_func3 stuff
> > is, as the comment says, to avoid a long sleep (100 ms) inside a work
> > routine. With all the changes to the work queue infrastructure, maybe
> > this doesn't matter so much any more. If we got rid of it then there
> > wouldn't be any multiplexing, and this whole issue would become moot.
>
> I don't really think that'd be necessary. Just sleeping synchronously
> should be fine. How many threads are we talking about?

One thread per hub (no more than 10 on a typical system). The code in
question is part of the hub driver's probe sequence.


On Sat, 22 Feb 2014, Peter Hurley wrote:

> If a running hub init does not need to be single-threaded wrt
> a different running hub init,

I'm not quite sure what that means, but the hub init threads are indeed
independent of each other.

> then a single init work could be queued to
> the system_unbound_wq which doesn't care about running times.

This sort of thing sounds like the best approach. Tejun, do you want
to rewrite the patch, getting rid of the hub_init_func3 and HUB_INIT3
business entirely? Or would you like me to do it?

Alan Stern



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-23 00:41    [W:0.091 / U:0.044 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site