1. 24 12月, 2010 7 次提交
  2. 21 12月, 2010 1 次提交
    • T
      workqueue: allow chained queueing during destruction · c8efcc25
      Tejun Heo 提交于
      Currently, destroy_workqueue() makes the workqueue deny all new
      queueing by setting WQ_DYING and flushes the workqueue once before
      proceeding with destruction; however, there are cases where work items
      queue more related work items.  Currently, such users need to
      explicitly flush the workqueue multiple times depending on the
      possible depth of such chained queueing.
      
      This patch updates the queueing path such that a work item can queue
      further work items on the same workqueue even when WQ_DYING is set.
      The flush on destruction is automatically retried until the workqueue
      is empty.  This guarantees that the workqueue is empty on destruction
      while allowing chained queueing.
      
      The flush retry logic whines if it takes too many retries to drain the
      workqueue.
      Signed-off-by: NTejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
      Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
      c8efcc25
  3. 15 12月, 2010 2 次提交
  4. 14 12月, 2010 2 次提交
    • S
      workqueue: It is likely that WORKER_NOT_RUNNING is true · 2d64672e
      Steven Rostedt 提交于
      Running the annotate branch profiler on three boxes, including my
      main box that runs firefox, evolution, xchat, and is part of the distcc farm,
      showed this with the likelys in the workqueue code:
      
       correct incorrect  %        Function                  File              Line
       ------- ---------  -        --------                  ----              ----
            96   996253  99 wq_worker_sleeping             workqueue.c          703
            96   996247  99 wq_worker_waking_up            workqueue.c          677
      
      The likely()s in this case were assuming that WORKER_NOT_RUNNING will
      most likely be false. But this is not the case. The reason is
      (and shown by adding trace_printks and testing it) that most of the time
      WORKER_PREP is set.
      
      In worker_thread() we have:
      
      	worker_clr_flags(worker, WORKER_PREP);
      
      	[ do work stuff ]
      
      	worker_set_flags(worker, WORKER_PREP, false);
      
      (that 'false' means not to wake up an idle worker)
      
      The wq_worker_sleeping() is called from schedule when a worker thread
      is putting itself to sleep. Which happens most of the time outside
      of that [ do work stuff ].
      
      The wq_worker_waking_up is called by the wakeup worker code, which
      is also callod outside that [ do work stuff ].
      
      Thus, the likely and unlikely used by those two functions are actually
      backwards.
      
      Remove the annotation and let gcc figure it out.
      Acked-by: NTejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
      Signed-off-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
      Signed-off-by: NTejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
      2d64672e
    • T
      MAINTAINERS: Add workqueue entry · 3e6cd7a4
      Tejun Heo 提交于
      Signed-off-by: NTejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
      3e6cd7a4
  5. 26 11月, 2010 1 次提交
  6. 25 11月, 2010 27 次提交