From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755744Ab0JTAyE (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:54:04 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:13994 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751783Ab0JTAyD (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:54:03 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.57,353,1283756400"; d="scan'208";a="848913765" Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 08:54:00 +0800 From: Wu Fengguang To: Tejun Heo Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro , Mel Gorman , lkml , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH wq#for-next] workqueue: Clarify that schedule_on_each_cpu is synchronous Message-ID: <20101020005400.GB5343@localhost> References: <4CB8725B.9010200@kernel.org> <20101018094403.GW30667@csn.ul.ie> <20101019133750.A1E6.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <4CBD6276.7070803@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4CBD6276.7070803@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 05:18:46PM +0800, Tejun Heo wrote: > The documentation for schedule_on_each_cpu() states that it calls a > function on each online CPU from keventd. This can easily be > interpreted as an asyncronous call because the description does not > mention that flush_work is called. Clarify that it is synchronous. > > tj: rephrased a bit > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman > Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo Nice comment! Reviewed-by: Wu Fengguang