On 02/01/17 16:16, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 01:01:35PM +0000, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: >> Later patches don't want or need to serialize the cancellation of an >> operation. This patch adds gb_operation_cancel_async() as a simple subset >> of the existing gb_operation_cancel() sans the synchronous wait on the >> cancellation queue. > > This one is not needed and complicates the interface for no good reason > (the async suffix also falsely indicates that this function could be > called from atomic context). > > Just cancel synchronously in the delayed worker function you add later > in the series. > > Johan > hmm ... sounds sensible in principle. Let me test that out gott nytt år ! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
