On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 04:52:37PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Since the patches before implemented the new kernel workqueue based > btrfs_worqueue_struct, the old btrfs workqueue(btrfs_worker) can be > removed without any problem. > > Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/btrfs/Makefile | 2 +- > fs/btrfs/async-thread.c | 714 ------------------------------------------------ > fs/btrfs/async-thread.h | 119 -------- > fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 3 - > fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c | 1 - > fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 24 +- > fs/btrfs/raid56.c | 1 - > fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 1 - > fs/btrfs/super.c | 8 - > fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 1 - > fs/btrfs/volumes.h | 1 - > 11 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 865 deletions(-) > delete mode 100644 fs/btrfs/async-thread.c > delete mode 100644 fs/btrfs/async-thread.h This is exciting. I'm excited. > - worker->task = kthread_run(worker_loop, worker, > - "btrfs-%s-%d", workers->name, > - workers->num_workers + 1); I bet this simply removes the possibility of the silly problem Eric once saw where you can have threads with the same name. (naming things based on the number of things gives duplicate names if the things are destroyed and recreated out of order.) - z -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
