Re: [PATCH 1/2] workqueues: implement flush_work()

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 06/14, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 05:59:51PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 06/14, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> ...
> > > Another question is if schedule_on_each_cpu() is really such a good
> > > example here: it seems these "xxx && yyy" examples could be faster,
> > > but I've lost track of this earlier thread.
> > 
> > schedule_on_each_cpu() can't use cancel_ + ->func(), the code should
> > be executed on the remote CPU.
> 
> ???
> Actually I meant this "xxx && yyy" schedule_on_each_cpu():
> 
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121329259203187&w=2

Ah, sorry, I misunderstood.

Yes, "xxx && yyy" needs only 1 wakeup, so it needs less CPU. But it also
more complex, and it is not easy to generalize this.

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/