Re: [PATCH 0/4] allow multiple kthreadd's

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 11:39:20AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Bruce.
> 
> On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 11:36:58AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 05:25:27PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 05:09:56PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > > It's not the end of the world but a bit hacky. I wonder whether something
> > > > like the following would work better for identifying worker type so that you
> > > > can do sth like
> > > > 
> > > >  if (kthread_fn(current) == nfsd)
> > > >         return kthread_data(current);
> > > >  else
> > > >         return NULL;     
> > > 
> > > Yes, definitely more generic, looks good to me.
> > 
> > This is what I'm testing with.
> > 
> > If it's OK with you, could I add your Signed-off-by and take it through
> > the nfsd tree? I'll have some other patches that will depend on it.
> 
> Please feel free to use the code however you see fit. Given that it'll be
> originating from you, my signed-off-by might not be the right tag. Something
> like Original-patch-by should be good (nothing is fine too).

OK, I'll do that, thanks!

--b.