Hello,
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 04:39:22PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
...
> +void wakeup_and_destroy_kthread_worker(struct kthread_worker *worker)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *task = worker->task;
> +
> + if (WARN_ON(!task))
> + return;
> +
> + spin_lock_irq(&worker->lock);
> + if (worker->current_work)
> + wake_up_process(worker->task);
> + spin_unlock_irq(&worker->lock);
> +
> + destroy_kthread_worker(worker);
> +}
I don't know. Wouldn't it make far more sense to convert those wake
up events with queueings? It seems backwards to be converting things
to work item based interface and then insert work items which wait for
external events. More on this later.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>