From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932459AbbCXPz0 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:55:26 -0400
Received: from mail-qg0-f44.google.com ([209.85.192.44]:34843 "EHLO
	mail-qg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932433AbbCXPzU (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:55:20 -0400
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:55:09 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>,
        Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4 V5] workqueue: split apply_workqueue_attrs() into 3
 stages
Message-ID: <20150324155509.GH3880@htj.duckdns.org>
References: <1426136412-7594-1-git-send-email-laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
 <1426653617-3240-1-git-send-email-laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
 <1426653617-3240-3-git-send-email-laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1426653617-3240-3-git-send-email-laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:40:15PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> +static void wq_unbound_install_ctx_free(struct wq_unbound_install_ctx *ctx)

Maybe naminig it more consistently with apply_workqueue_attrs() is
better?  apply_wqattrs_cleanup()?

>  {
> +	int node;
> +
> +	if (ctx) {
> +		/* put the pwqs */
> +		for_each_node(node)
> +			put_pwq_unlocked(ctx->pwq_tbl[node]);
> +		put_pwq_unlocked(ctx->dfl_pwq);
> +
> +		free_workqueue_attrs(ctx->attrs);
> +	}
> +
> +	kfree(ctx);
> +}

Wouldn't the following be better?  Or at least put kfree(ctx) together
with the rest?

	if (!ctx)
		return;
	the rest;

> +
> +/* Allocates the attrs and pwqs for later installment */
> +static struct wq_unbound_install_ctx *
> +wq_unbound_install_ctx_prepare(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
> +			       const struct workqueue_attrs *attrs)
> +{

apply_wqattrs_prepare()?

...
> +out_free:
> +	free_workqueue_attrs(tmp_attrs);
> +
> +	if (!ctx || !ctx->wq) {
> +		kfree(new_attrs);
> +		wq_unbound_install_ctx_free(ctx);
> +		return NULL;
> +	} else {
> +		return ctx;
> +	}
> +}

Let's separate out error return path even if that takes another goto
or a duplicate free_workqueue_attrs() call.

> +/* Set the unbound_attr and install the prepared pwqs. Should not fail */
> +static void wq_unbound_install_ctx_commit(struct wq_unbound_install_ctx *ctx)

apply_wqattrs_commit()?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun