On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 10:53 +0100, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, James. > > On 12/12/2010 11:48 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > > The analysis above isn't quite correct, I'm afraid. We use the > > execute_in_process_context() not to avoid deadlocks, but to acquire > > process context if we don't have it because the API allows calling from > > sites at interrupt context. The point of using > > execute_in_process_context() is that we actually want to make use of the > > user context if we have one ... there's no point using a workqueue in > > that case, because there's nothing to be gained (except to slow > > everything down). We have no ordering constraints (the traditional > > reason for using workqueues) so this is purely about context. > > Sure, what I tried to say was that the change couldn't introduce > deadlock no matter how it was used. Sure execute_in_process_context() > would be slightly more efficient, but it currently is used a few times > only in quite cold paths where optimization isn't necessary at all and > the API is somewhat incomplete in that it doesn't provide ordering or > synchronization APIs. That's the point ... it's purely for operations which require user context which may not have it. There's no synchronisation by design (it's a simple API). > So, unless there's a compelling reason, let's remove it. The open coding of if (in_atomic()) { do workqueue stuff } else { execute function } is rather bug prone (most people tend to do in_interrupt()). It's better to encapsulate it in an API. > It has been > there for quite some time now and hasn't grown any other users. There > wouldn't be any noticeable difference for the current users either. > If you really like to keep it in the current users, let's move it into > SCSI. I don't see much reason to keep it as a part of generic > workqueue API in its current form. It was in SCSI ... I got told to make it generic. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html