Re: Singlethread vs. freezable workqueues

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>]

On 05/21, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> On Monday, 21 May 2007 22:23, Alan Stern wrote:
> > 
> > The reason I asked is because, prior to the release of 2.6.22, I sent 
> > in a patch which added a create_singlethread_freezeable_workqueue() 
> > macro.  Now it isn't needed, since create_freezeable_workqueue() does 
> > the same thing.  Is there any reason to keep the macro?
> > 
> > I'm worried that if I get rid of it and simply define the workqueue as 
> > freezable, then at some time in the future it might turn into a 
> > multithread workqueue without my knowledge.
> 
> If we introduce multithread freezable workqueues again, we'll have to review
> all current users of create_freezeable_workqueue() anyway to see whether or
> not they need to use a singlethread workqueue.  Still, if you added a comment
> saying that your workqueue had to be singlethread, that would certainly help. ;-)

Probably Alan is right? Perhaps it is better to rename it to
create_singlethread_freezeable_workqueue(). This way we don't need to audit
the users when we add multithread freezable wqs.

Also, this name is more consistent wrt create_workqueue/create_singlethread_workqueue.

Oleg.