On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 05:46:30PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: > On 07/26/2010 05:34 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On 07/26/2010 05:25 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> BTW, kthread_worker would benefit from the optimization I implemented > >> here as well. > > > > Hmmm... I'm not quite sure whether it's an optimization. I thought > > the patch was due to feeling uncomfortable about using barriers? Is > > it an optimization? > > Yeah, one less smp_mb() in execution path. The lock dancing in > flush() is ugly but then again mucking with barriers could be harder > to understand. Care to send a patch against wq#for-next tree? > > Thanks. Sure. Where's that, exactly? > -- > tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
