Hi Oleg,

(sending from a different email address)

> Oleg Nesterov wrote on 09/29/2008 07:57:34 PM:
> Yes. I must admit, I prefer the simple, non-intrusive code I suggested
> much more.
> Once again, the slow path is (at least, supposed to be) unlikely, and
> the difference is not that large. (I mean the slow path is when both
> queue() and update_timer() fail).
> Should we complicate the code to add this minor optimization (and
> btw pessimize the "normal" queue_delayed_work) ?
> And, once we have the correct and simple code, we can optimize it
> later.
> > I will go with the above
> > approach.

> No. Please do what _you_ think right

No, you are right - I will go to the simpler (and bug-free?) interface.

> Yes. Please note that queue_delayed_work(work, 0) does not use the timer
> at all. IOW, queue_delayed_work(wq, work, 0) == queue_work(wq, &dwork->work).
> Perhaps (I don't know) update_queue_delayed_work() should do the same.
> From the next patch:
> - cancel_delayed_work(&afs_vlocation_reap);
> - schedule_delayed_work(&afs_vlocation_reap, 0);
> + schedule_update_delayed_work(&afs_vlocation_reap, 0);
> Again, I don't claim this is wrong, but please note that delay == 0.

As you stated in an earlier mail, the following code should handle all cases.
I think delay==0 is fine now, we take the costly (but rare) path.

int queue_update_delayed_work(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
struct delayed_work *dwork, unsigned long delay)
int ret = 1;

while (queue_delayed_work(wq, dwork, delay)) {
unsigned long when = jiffies + delay;

ret = 0;
if (delay && update_timer_expiry(&dwork->timer, when))

return ret;

I will run some tests and submit again.

Thanks once more for explaining patiently some very complicated portions

- KK

Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now, on http://help.yahoo.com/l/in/yahoo/mai...tools-08.html/
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/