On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 02:39:59PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 03:00:07 am Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 03:31:20PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > > But it's still nasty to use half an API. If it were a few places I would
> > > have open-coded it with a comment, or wrapped it. As it is, I don't think
> > > that would be a win.
> >
> > So would it help to have a rcu_read_lock_workqueue() and
> > rcu_read_unlock_workqueue() that checked nesting and whether they were
> > actually running in the context of a workqueue item? Or did you have
> > something else in mind? Or am I misjudging the level of sarcasm in
> > your reply? ;-)
>
> You read correctly. If we get a second user, creating an API makes sense.
Makes sense to me as well. Which does provide some time to come up with
a primitive designed to answer the question "Am I currently executing in
the context of a workqueue item?". ;-)
Thanx, Paul
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
