From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: Bhaktipriya Shridhar <bhaktipriya96@gmail.com>,
boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, david.vrabel@citrix.com,
jgross@suse.com, JBeulich@suse.com, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com,
stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, cardoe@cardoe.com,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen: xen-pciback: Remove create_workqueue
Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 12:08:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160527160822.GO23194@mtj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160527160114.GB1842@char.us.oracle.com>
Hello,
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 12:01:14PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 09:24:11PM +0530, Bhaktipriya Shridhar wrote:
> > With concurrency managed workqueues, use of dedicated workqueues can be
> > replaced by using system_wq. Drop host->intr_wq by using
^
xen_pcibk_wq
> > system_wq.
> >
> > Since there is only a single work item, increase of concurrency level by
> > switching to system_wq should not break anything.
>
> _should_ not? Hehe. I presume this has not been tested?
Yeah, this is a part of sweeping conversions and it's challenging (and
often impossible for specific drivers) to setup test environments.
xen isn't as bad but can still be a pretty specialized setup. The
conversions aren't high risk and shouldn't be too difficult to root
cause when something goes south. We'd greatly appreciate any helps
with reviewing and testing.
> > cancel_work_sync() has been used in xen_pcibk_disconnect() to ensure that
> > work item is not pending or executing by the time exit path runs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bhaktipriya Shridhar <bhaktipriya96@gmail.com>
> > @@ -76,8 +75,7 @@ static void xen_pcibk_disconnect(struct xen_pcibk_device *pdev)
> > /* If the driver domain started an op, make sure we complete it
> > * before releasing the shared memory */
> >
> > - /* Note, the workqueue does not use spinlocks at all.*/
> > - flush_workqueue(xen_pcibk_wq);
> > + cancel_work_sync(&pdev->op_work);
Should it be flush_work() instead? Is it okay for a pdev->op_work to
be queued and canceled without actually getting executed?
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-27 16:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-27 15:54 Bhaktipriya Shridhar
2016-05-27 16:01 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2016-05-27 16:08 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2016-05-27 16:32 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2016-05-31 10:11 ` David Vrabel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160527160822.GO23194@mtj.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=bhaktipriya96@gmail.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=cardoe@cardoe.com \
--cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®