Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1215771

Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee

From Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee
Date 2015-08-29 15:00 +0200
Message-ID <q2NTJ-2fK-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <q2Enn-5vz-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <q2EQq-6ip-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <q2KCv-65w-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On 08/29, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> So I'm wondering, is there any strong reason why we couldn't use a double linked
> list and still do FIFO and remove that silly linear list walking hack?

This will obviously enlarge callback_head, and it is often embedded.
But this is minor.

If we use a double linked list we can't do task_work_add() lockless.
So we will need another spinlock_t in task_struct. We can't use pi_lock.

Oleg.

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

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 04:50 +0200
  Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2015-08-29 05:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2015-08-29 11:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-08-29 15:00 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2015-08-31 08:10 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-08-31 15:00 +0200
  Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-08-29 15:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 16:00 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 16:20 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2015-08-29 19:10 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 07:30 +0200
            Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2015-09-05 07:20 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-08-31 14:50 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2015-09-05 07:20 +0200
            Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2015-09-05 07:50 +0200
              Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2015-09-05 22:50 +0200
      change filp_close() to use __fput_sync() ? (Was: [PATCH]  task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee) Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-08-31 14:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2015-09-05 07:40 +0200

csiph-web