Re: [PATCH wq#for-next] workqueue: add and use WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag

[Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>]

Hi,

On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 15:22 +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Add WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag which currently maps to WQ_RESCUER, mark
> WQ_RESCUER as internal and replace all external WQ_RESCUER usages to
> WQ_MEM_RECLAIM.
> 
> This makes the API users express the intent of the workqueue instead
> of indicating the internal mechanism used to guarantee forward
> progress.  This is also to make it cleaner to add more semantics to
> WQ_MEM_RECLAIM.  For example, if deemed necessary, memory reclaim
> workqueues can be made highpri.
> 
> This patch doesn't introduce any functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
> Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
> Cc: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
> ---
> WQ_RESCUER is a bit too specific to be directly used by workqueue
> users.  Let's clean it up before the usage is widespread.  If nobody
> objects, I'd like to route this through the workqueue tree.  Also, as
> WQ_RESCUER isn't removed, this won't break anything from other trees
> and those can be updated later.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
Looks good to me, but we'll need to bear in mind that this patch is
already queued for the next merge window:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/steve/gfs2-2.6-nmw.git;a=commitdiff;h=9fa0ea9f26f64fbfc3dfd51d1dc2c230b65ffb19

so we'll have to figure out how best to merge when the time comes,

Steve