lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2 V3] workqueue: substitute POOL_FREEZING with __WQ_FREEZING
On 04/23/2014 04:46 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 09:47:47AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> Testing workqueue_freezing requires wq_pool_mutex held.
>> Although almost-all pwq_adjust_max_active() are called with wq_pool_mutex held,
>> except workqueue_set_max_active(). But I hope pwq_adjust_max_active()
>> don't require the heavy wq_pool_mutex.
>
> No it doesn't require wq_pool_mutex to be held. All it requires is
> that the changed state is visible on the subsequent
> pwq_adjust_max_active() invocatino which is already trivially
> guaranteed.
>

Good! I understood! Could you respin the patch? I'm afraid
I can't explain it well in the comments.

For me, I always prefer locks for non-performance critical path,
locks help review, I believe your comment will do so.

Thanks,
Lai


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-23 11:41    [W:0.064 / U:1.076 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site