Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1343152 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-25 14:10 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-02-26 16:50 +0100 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH v5 10/20] kthread: Better support freezable kthread workers Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-02-25 14:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH v5 10/20] kthread: Better support freezable kthread workers Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> - 2016-02-26 16:50 +0100
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-25 14:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 10/20] kthread: Better support freezable kthread workers |
| Message-ID | <r63Q7-4en-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 03:57:00PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> +enum {
> + KTW_FREEZABLE = 1 << 2, /* freeze during suspend */
> +};
Weird value; what was wrong with 1 << 0 ?
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-26 16:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r6sOt-5pp-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1343152 |
On Thu 2016-02-25 14:01:15, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 03:57:00PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > +enum {
> > + KTW_FREEZABLE = 1 << 2, /* freeze during suspend */
> > +};
>
> Weird value; what was wrong with 1 << 0 ?
Heh, the flag was inspired by
WQ_FREEZABLE = 1 << 2, /* freeze during suspend */
from include/linux/workqueue.h. But it does not really matter.
I could change it to 1 << 0 if it makes people less curious.
Thanks a lot for review,
Petr
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web