On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 09:52 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > Ooh, yeah, I agree. That's next on the wq to-do list. The problem is > that queue_work() is implemented in terms of queue_work_on().
But that's trivial to fix, both could use __queue_work() without too much bother, right? > In most > cases, the local binding serves as locality optimization than anything > else. There are use cases where affinity is required for correctness. > The assumption was that they should flush during CPU_DOWN but it > probably will be much better to require users which need CPU affinity > to always use queue_work_on() - instead of implicit local affinity > from queue_work() - and flush them automatically from wq callback. > Right, and when you create this new mode, which you need to know to flush on DOWN, you can simply put a BUG_ON in queue_work_on() when this mode is set. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
