On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:

> > On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Iain Hibbert wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> > >
> > > > once callout_setwork() is called on a callout,
> > > > callout_schedule() is only legal operation on the callout.
> > >
> > > callout_schedule() cannot be called multiple times, either..
> >
> > I think that these issues would go away, if callout managed its own
> > kthread, instead of utilising workqueue to do that?
>
> i don't think they are issues.

I think they make it unclean. Maybe there are other opinions..

> > I see another issue though, in that if you want a callout in a thread, it
> > still does not mean you can take locks or do IO, because sleeping would
> > block the callout kthread.
>
> i don't think it's a problem unless it sleeps "very long".

how long is too long?

> is it worth to have an api for it?
> once you created your own workqueue, there are not many things left to do.
> just schedule a function to do workqueue_enqueue by callout_reset,
> and you've done.

True (and creating a workqueue is simple). Are you arguing against an api
for timed work now?

iain