On 01/26, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Andrew's suggestion does make sense though: for any not-in-progress > worklet we can dequeue that worklet and execute it in the flushing > context. [ And if that worklet cannot be dequeued because it's being > processed then that's fine and we can wait on that single worklet, without > waiting on any other 'unrelated' worklets. ] Yes sure. This is easy, and I am not sure we need the special handler. If the caller wants this behaviour, it can do: if (cancel_work_sync(work)) work->func(work); But flush_work() was specially introduced for the case when we can't do the above, > That does not help work_on_cpu() though: that facility really uses the > fact that workqueues are implemented via per CPU threads - hence we cannot > remove the worklet from the queue and execute it in the flushing context. Yes. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
