> -----Original Message----- > From: Johannes Thumshirn [mailto:jthumshirn@xxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 2:18 AM > To: Don Brace > Cc: jejb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Viswas G; Mahesh Rajashekhara; > hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Scott Teel; Kevin Barnett; Justin Lindley; Scott Benesh; > elliott@xxxxxxx; linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/17] smartpqi: minor tweaks to update time support > > EXTERNAL EMAIL > > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 08:29:20PM +0000, Don Brace wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Johannes Thumshirn [mailto:jthumshirn@xxxxxxx] > > [...] > > > > > The reason is that we want it run immediately (or close to immediately). > > > > The code could be restructured to avoid calling this function with a 0, but it > would result in more code and no benefit. > > OK, now I'm not sure if we talked past each other. I didn't mean > "don't call schedule_delayed_work() with a delay of 0" but "why aren't > you using schedule_work() instead". But maybe it's just too early in > the morning and I didn't have enough coffee yet. Because the two functions take different work structures as arguments: static inline bool schedule_delayed_work(struct delayed_work *dwork, unsigned long delay) static inline bool schedule_work(struct work_struct *work) > > Thanks, > Johannes > > -- > Johannes Thumshirn Storage > jthumshirn@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 689 > SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg > GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton > HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) > Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850 -- 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
