From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tejun Heo <tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/14] kthread: Add
 wakeup_and_destroy_kthread_worker()
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 13:23:29 -0400
Message-ID: <20150728172329.GB5322@mtj.duckdns.org>
References: <1438094371-8326-1-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com>
 <1438094371-8326-6-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1438094371-8326-6-git-send-email-pmladek-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt-nx8X9YLhiw1AfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>, Josh Triplett <josh-iaAMLnmF4UmaiuxdJuQwMA@public.gmane.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>, live-patching-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org

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