Re: block: add blk_run_queue_async

[Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Apr 18 2011 at  4:20pm -0400,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 18 2011 at  3:59pm -0400,
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 03:55:04PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > > +{
> > > > + ? ? ? if (likely(!blk_queue_stopped(q)))
> > > > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? queue_delayed_work(kblockd_workqueue, &q->delay_work, 0);
> > > 
> > > I know Jens already queued this up 'for-linus' but why not use
> > > kblockd_schedule_work(q, &q->delay_work)?
> > 
> > I don't see what that would buy us.  If we'd absolutely want a wrapper
> > a blk_delay_queue(q, 0) in Jens' current tree would do it now that is
> > has been fixed up to use the kblockd workqueue.
> 
> Right, I missed 4521cc4 block: blk_delay_queue() should use kblockd
> workqueue.  So why not use blk_delay_queue()?
> 
> I agree with Jens that it doesn't much matter but I also cannot see it
> being a bad thing.. I'd prefer it ;)
> 
> *shrug*

Also, FYI, I'm seeing a leftover '@force_kblockd: ...' comment in the
__blk_run_queue's comment block.