Subject: Re: [PATCH UPDATED 1/3] vhost: replace vhost_workqueue with per-vhost kthread

From: Tejun Heo <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 21:14:06 +0200

On 07/26/2010 06:51 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 06:14:30PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Just one more thing.
> 
> I noticed that with vhost, flush_work was getting the worker
> pointer as well. Can we live with this API change?

Yeah, the flushing mechanism wouldn't work reliably if the work is
queued to a different worker without flushing, so yeah passing in
@worker might actually be better.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun