From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
allen.lkml@gmail.com, kernel-team@meta.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET v2 wq/6.10] workqueue: Implement disable/enable_work()
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 08:53:22 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZdzeIvXkRidgyHol@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJhGHyAic563hZMLvbQ2X7RsZNmHHEYfh5Lr48cE1LGTUm_K_w@mail.gmail.com>
Hello,
On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 06:55:56PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> > While I agree that this can be argued either way, keeping the interface
> > congruent with the existing cancel_work_sync() and friends seems a lot more
> > important to me. It can be a bit more confusing for users who are used to
> > tasklet interface but then again we aren't gonna rename cancel_work_sync()
> > to kill_work() and the conversion overhead isn't all that significant or
> > lasting. However, if we break the consnistency within workqueue API, that's
> > a source of lasting confusion.
>
> I don't want to object to any names. But I'm still thinking of just providing
> disable_work_nosync() rather than disable work(). It will be used
> at only places at most.
Yeah, I get your point. That's the same for cancel_work_sync(). I'll think
about it some more but I'm not sure either way is clearly better here.
Thanks.
--
tejun
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-26 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-21 17:42 [PATCHSET v2 wq/6.10] workqueue: Implement disable/enable_work() Tejun Heo
2024-02-21 17:42 ` [PATCH 1/7] workqueue: Preserve OFFQ bits in cancel[_sync] paths Tejun Heo
2024-02-22 4:35 ` Lai Jiangshan
2024-02-22 8:05 ` Tejun Heo
2024-02-21 17:43 ` [PATCH 2/7] workqueue: Implement disable/enable for (delayed) work items Tejun Heo
2024-02-22 4:34 ` Lai Jiangshan
2024-02-22 8:22 ` Tejun Heo
2024-02-21 17:43 ` [PATCH 3/7] workqueue: Remove WORK_OFFQ_CANCELING Tejun Heo
2024-02-21 17:43 ` [PATCH 4/7] workqueue: Remember whether a work item was on a BH workqueue Tejun Heo
2024-02-21 17:43 ` [PATCH 5/7] workqueue: Update how start_flush_work() is called Tejun Heo
2024-02-21 17:43 ` [PATCH 6/7] workqueue: Allow cancel_work_sync() and disable_work() from atomic contexts on BH work items Tejun Heo
2024-02-22 4:36 ` Lai Jiangshan
2024-02-22 8:32 ` Tejun Heo
2024-02-21 17:43 ` [PATCH 7/7] r8152: Convert from tasklet to BH workqueue Tejun Heo
2024-02-22 3:33 ` [PATCHSET v2 wq/6.10] workqueue: Implement disable/enable_work() Lai Jiangshan
2024-02-22 4:59 ` Lai Jiangshan
2024-02-22 8:56 ` Tejun Heo
2024-02-22 9:16 ` Tejun Heo
2024-02-25 10:55 ` Lai Jiangshan
2024-02-26 18:53 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZdzeIvXkRidgyHol@slm.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=allen.lkml@gmail.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox