Re: [PATCH v1 3/6] workqueue: introduce schedule_on_each_cpu_cond
From: Gilad Ben-Yossef
Date: Wed May 09 2012 - 10:26:45 EST
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 04:15:30PM +0300, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
>> A single helper function called schedule_on_each_cpu_cond() is very
>> obvious to find to someone reading the source or documentation. On
>> the other hand figuring out that the helper functions that handle
>> cpu hotplug and cpumask allocation are there for that purpose is a
>> bit more involved.
>> That was my thinking at least.
> Yeah, having common mechanism is nice, but I just prefer iterators /
> helpers which can be embedded in the caller to interface which takes a
> callback unless the execution context is actually asynchronous to the
> caller. We don't use nested functions / scopes in kernel which makes
> those callbacks (higher order functions, lambdas, gammas, zetas
> whatever) painful to use and follow.
>> The way i see it, I can either obliterate on_each_cpu_cond() and out
>> its code in place in the LRU path, or fix the callback to get an
>> extra private data parameter -
> Unless we can code up something pretty, I vote for just open coding it
> for now. If we grow more usages like this, maybe we'll be able to see
> the pattern better and come up with better abstraction.
Got you. Will do.
Chief Coffee Drinker
Israel Cell: +972-52-8260388
US Cell: +1-973-8260388
"If you take a class in large-scale robotics, can you end up in a
situation where the homework eats your dog?"
-- Jean-Baptiste Queru
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/