From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752521AbaBWE3g (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Feb 2014 23:29:36 -0500 Received: from mail-qg0-f41.google.com ([209.85.192.41]:41021 "EHLO mail-qg0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752389AbaBWE3e (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Feb 2014 23:29:34 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 23:29:29 -0500 From: Tejun Heo To: Alan Stern Cc: Peter Hurley , laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, Kernel development list , Greg Kroah-Hartman , USB list Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] usb: don't use PREPARE_DELAYED_WORK Message-ID: <20140223042929.GA20474@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <20140222153755.GG12830@htj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hey, Alan. On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 06:03:04PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > then a single init work could be queued to > > the system_unbound_wq which doesn't care about running times. > > This sort of thing sounds like the best approach. Tejun, do you want > to rewrite the patch, getting rid of the hub_init_func3 and HUB_INIT3 > business entirely? Or would you like me to do it? I'll doing the minimal patch in this series and then following up with the update is probably better. I can put the patches in a separate branch so that it can be easily pulled. Thanks. -- tejun