On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > Hi, > > According to description of 'destroy_workqueue()': > "Safely destroy a workqueue. All work currently pending will be done first" > > Looking deeper at the code, it turns out that the call chain is: > destroy_workqueue > --> drain_workqueue > --> flush_workqueue > > So, calling explicitly 'flush_workqueue()' before 'destroy_workqueue()' looks > redundant. > > Using following coccinelle script spots ~90 occurrences, in ~80 files, which > can be simplified. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > @r@ > expression e; > @@ > - flush_workqueue(e); > destroy_workqueue(e); > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > This is way to much for me because my patch submission process is mainly > manual. > > If you agree with my analysis, think that removing these redundant calls is > useful and have a much more automated patch submission process than me (or > just have time :), please feel free to submit patches. The Coccinelle distriubution contains a program splitpatch (make splitpatch in the tools subdirectory) that can be used for cutting up patches and sending them to their various maintainers. There is a file tools/README.splitpatch that explains how to use it (although I am not sure that this README is completely up to date...). julia
