Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 11:40:46 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: taskqueue_drain_all Message-ID: <5295BE1E.5090401@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmonjLcp4=A%2BdRShaGVXhe67VaVtR5kY2DJcZUBOOYW8KoA@mail.gmail.com> References: <525519F1.3050703@FreeBSD.org> <5295032B.4010200@FreeBSD.org> <CAJ-VmonjLcp4=A%2BdRShaGVXhe67VaVtR5kY2DJcZUBOOYW8KoA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 26/11/2013 23:44 Adrian Chadd said the following: > Hi, > > On 26 November 2013 12:23, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> wrote: >> on 09/10/2013 11:55 Andriy Gapon said the following: >>> >>> I would like to propose to extend taskqueue API with taskqueue_drain_all. >>> A potential use case: I have a private taskqueue, several kinds of tasks get >>> executed via it and then I want to make sure that all of them are completed. >>> Obviously, I have a way to ensure that no new ones get enqueued. >> >> Provided I do not get any no-s or why-s I am going to commit the following >> slightly different version soon: >> >> http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/taskqueue_drain_all.diff >> >> P.S. >> taskqueue_drain_running introduced in the above patch could also be used to add >> wait semantics to taskqueue_block. >> > > So you're going to keep taskqueue_drain() semantics of running the > tasks if they're queued? Yes, of course. Why? -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5295BE1E.5090401>