From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC94B4F96AD for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 21:31:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790631075; cv=none; b=pk0UUv/L22He8TrCnpWSV35HgTAErJFuU7j26iHEnTvJMYOcMNdbDxqT4iDWPDa7wz87dNiu4RY8nZRllAh040LiQrsozse9RFqcGAUQ2qx8Xq650OS66Qn3Y/PLpQq53PYsThcOMyt3kcmgrF7DAvVT2Or8+sWLweKHX8+YJ88= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790631075; c=relaxed/simple; bh=14CjeDzlncrsUDvx8meKCe4UR2VXZR8CQ0dWNYgN/bM=; h=Date:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=U7nIKMck2jMj5C09kPauXhZJS5+wbU2RiOLqIQxhuZ6NqCIFwxonfLzXvkqlWy8dSK85aZM8zY84w7LN2opbVzWphdzcas7xlsDe7+mMIeegTGv8knGVYcdBLQ+pclkcJ9KnwA/Z3MUir+KsQsn5kbc8e1KJ1rocQXQodkIlsW8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=IHR0+wcF; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="IHR0+wcF" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1968B1F000FF; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 21:31:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790631072; bh=14CjeDzlncrsUDvx8meKCe4UR2VXZR8CQ0dWNYgN/bM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=IHR0+wcFGVH0CZEX+Zv9srriAWE/CH4/abBf2EEo66dg3ew0oHccYcjB7X8ZVrrfV BOsxZV3YLcDP27gO5Y78iItI1OiOiBaZOWx5gcHlOn2RbrgkA5iT9ANWGcvzrILI8+ FytYrBRCAHrEc+KQ5TpR7843p9pnTYc0LNQ1vvr7hkfjhb/51rZOI5yaybxg9wiMt1 mGHLszv/6LGQsynqsl84e225MMpma07AwEJ5iPLDe+MCf1DR4skdT3Rct0edhcTbeM 6UqFkSlgbU7eGpSAsc1vSZzRTJEa572YHpP9YeGPAEjSjlPizpf33kCf4v6aVIiFd2 JvZN23xluY/6Q== Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 11:31:11 -1000 Message-ID: <1bcd7a71f382de147d7e26ee14f00ac7@kernel.org> From: Tejun Heo To: Breno Leitao Cc: Lai Jiangshan , Marco Crivellari , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com Subject: Re: [PATCH wq/for-7.4 v2 3/3] workqueue: add a percpu_concurrency_managed workqueue attribute In-Reply-To: <20260925-wq_final-v2-3-860ee052169e@debian.org> References: <20260925-wq_final-v2-0-860ee052169e@debian.org> <20260925-wq_final-v2-3-860ee052169e@debian.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Hello, Breno. On Fri, Sep 25, 2026 at 06:09:52AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote: > Introduce percpu_concurrency_managed, similar to the discussion in [1], > and use it when deciding to do concurrency management, instead of > relying on WQ_PERCPU (the only WQ type that does CM as of now). Once PERCPU is its own scope, the scope picks the backend, and concurrency management and the per-cpu max_active follow from that. Opting out of concurrency management on the per-cpu pools is what WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE already does, and I don't see a need to change that at runtime. How about dropping this patch for now? Thanks. -- tejun