On Mon 2020-10-05 18:21:05, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 10:38:29 Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Sun 2020-10-04 10:12:13, Hillf Danton wrote:
> > > What is the difference of invoking kthread_queue_delayed_work() from the
> > > callback from kthread_mod_delayed_work()?
> >
> >
On Mon 2020-10-05 10:38:29, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Sun 2020-10-04 10:12:13, Hillf Danton wrote:
> > On Fri, 02 Oct 2020 10:32:32 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > So having a consistent behaviour accross all these facilities makes
> > > absolutely sense and I don't agree with your sentiment in the
On Sun 2020-10-04 10:12:13, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
> On Fri, 02 Oct 2020 10:32:32 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 02 2020 at 10:34, Hillf Danton wrote:
> > > On Thu, 01 Oct 2020 15:59:38 +0200 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Oct 01 2020 at 17:51, Hillf Danton wrote:
> > >> Aside of
On Fri, Oct 02 2020 at 10:34, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Oct 2020 15:59:38 +0200 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 01 2020 at 17:51, Hillf Danton wrote:
>> Aside of that it's pretty irrelevant whether there is a user at the
>> moment which reschedules work from the callback or not.
>>
On Thu, Oct 01 2020 at 17:51, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 17:01:09 +0200 Petr Mladek wrote:
>> On Sat 2020-09-26 12:04:26, Hillf Danton wrote:
>> >
>> > It does not make much sense to rearm timer for the delayed work if
>> > it is worker's current work atm because it's good to do
On Sat 2020-09-26 12:04:26, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
> It does not make much sense to rearm timer for the delayed work if
> it is worker's current work atm because it's good to do work only
> once.
Quite typical scenario is to queue delayed work from its own callback.
It allows to do the work in
6 matches
Mail list logo
