Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 May 2015 10:06:53 +0800 | From | Lai Jiangshan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/7 V2] workqueue: cleanup for attr management |
| |
On 05/18/2015 09:26 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 08:39:21AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: >> ping > > Does this reflect the comments from the previous review cycle? >
This is the V2 version of the V1 pathset. But it is just the updated version of the patch1&2 of the V1 patchset.
It doesn't contains the fix-up patch for wq_[nice|cpumask|numa]_store(), so I can say it reflects all the comments except the name of the function "get_node_unbound_pwq()" (patch was sent earlier than your replied). (I wish I can get more comments before the next version).
The fix-up patch for wq_[nice|cpumask|numa]_store() is so important, should I directly send a patchset for it (including the patch1&2 of this V2 patchset)? (and delay or even drop the "get_alloc_node_unbound_pwq()").
Thanks, Lai.
| |