Re: [PATCH] genirq: don't use flush_scheduled_work() in IRQ affinitynotifiers

[Tejun Heo]

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 05:49:20PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 11:45 +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:28:06AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > This facility is enabled on all configurations with NET && SMP &&
> > > GENERIC_HARDIRQS, but at the moment is only useful for some net drivers
> > > (currently only one).  So I don't think it should be creating a task at
> > > boot time.  Does alloc_workqueue() still create any tasks immediately?
> > 
> > Nope, no need to worry about it.  The only added overhead is the
> > memory occupied by workqueue itself (which includes small percpu area
> > but one systemwide one isn't gonna hurt anyone and we've been
> > decreasing the number of workqueues significantly).  It just serves as
> > a flush domain.
> 
> Sorry I didn't reply to this earlier.
> 
> Given what you've said, I see no problem with this change.  So you can
> add:
> 
> Acked-by: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thomas, I suppose this should be routed through tip:irq/core?  Or
shall I push it through wq tree?

Thank you.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/