Re: [PATCH 32/40] async: introduce workqueue based alternativeimplementation

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 09:57:44 +0900
Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Now that cmwq can handle high concurrency, there's no reason to
> implement separate thread pool for async.  Introduce alternative
> implementation based on workqueue.
> 


I'm sorry but I'm really not happy with this conversion;
it looses the very nice property of being able to execute and
synchronize between places at the end just before device registration.

I don't mind the implementation sharing thread pool with your stuff,
but I really really want to keep the cookie and synchronization
mechanism. There's a bunch of users of that pending and doing things
sequential entirely just is not going to cut it.


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/