Hello, On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 09:39:29AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > Hmm, I didn't agree it's more confusing to change copy_workqueue_attrs(), the
We're talking past each other. I'm not saying copy_workqueue_attrs() shouldn't copy no_numa. I'm saying get_unbound_pool() should clear no_numa so that pools don't have random no_numa settings. > name of the function suggests it is a 'copy'. And clearing no_numa in > apply_workqueue_attrs() after copy_workqueue_attrs() looks like a hack to me. Why would apply_workqueue_attrs() modify no_numa when it *is* dealing with an actual workqueue attr. I've been talking about get_unbound_pool() not apply_workqueue_attrs() the whole time. > But it depends on you, feel free to fix it by yourself. Please update the patch to add no_numa clearing to get_unbound_pool() and explain what's going on. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/
