From: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: tom.leiming@gmail.com, arjan@infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/async.c:introduce async_schedule*_atomic
Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 19:18:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090512191848.25764af6@gondolin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090512165227.GE6255@nowhere>
On Tue, 12 May 2009 18:52:29 +0200,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> This division would make more sense indeed.
>
> - async_schedule_inatomic() would be nosync() and would use
> GFP_ATOMIC. I guess the case where we want to run
> a job synchronously from atomic in case of async failure is too rare
> (non-existent?).
It would add complexity for those callers providing a function that is
safe to be called in both contexts.
> - async_schedule_nosync() would be only nosync() and would use
> GFP_KERNEL
>
> I'm not sure the second case will ever be used though.
It might make sense for the "just fail if we cannot get memory" case.
>
> Another alternative would be to define a single async_schedule_nosync()
> which also takes a gfp flag.
Wouldn't async_schedule() then need a gfp flag as well?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-12 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-12 15:13 [PATCH] kernel/async.c:introduce async_schedule*_atomic tom.leiming
2009-05-12 15:44 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-12 15:58 ` Américo Wang
2009-05-13 0:36 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-12 16:04 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-12 16:31 ` Cornelia Huck
2009-05-12 16:52 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-12 17:18 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2009-05-13 0:28 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-13 1:20 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-13 7:47 ` Cornelia Huck
2009-05-17 20:59 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-05-18 11:29 ` Cornelia Huck
2009-05-13 3:27 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-13 0:16 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-17 20:26 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-05-18 1:55 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-18 4:18 ` Arjan van de Ven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090512191848.25764af6@gondolin \
--to=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tom.leiming@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.