mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH 0/3] block: replace wq users and add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue() users
@ 2025-09-05  8:51 Marco Crivellari
  2025-09-05  8:51 ` [PATCH 1/3] drivers/block: replace use of system_wq with system_percpu_wq Marco Crivellari
                   ` (3 more replies)
  0 siblings, 4 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Marco Crivellari @ 2025-09-05  8:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel, linux-block
  Cc: Tejun Heo, Lai Jiangshan, Frederic Weisbecker,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Marco Crivellari, Michal Hocko,
	Jens Axboe

Hi!

Below is a summary of a discussion about the Workqueue API and cpu isolation
considerations. Details and more information are available here:

        "workqueue: Always use wq_select_unbound_cpu() for WORK_CPU_UNBOUND."
        https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250221112003.1dSuoGyc@linutronix.de/

=== Current situation: problems ===

Let's consider a nohz_full system with isolated CPUs: wq_unbound_cpumask is
set to the housekeeping CPUs, for !WQ_UNBOUND the local CPU is selected.

This leads to different scenarios if a work item is scheduled on an isolated
CPU where "delay" value is 0 or greater then 0:
        schedule_delayed_work(, 0);

This will be handled by __queue_work() that will queue the work item on the
current local (isolated) CPU, while:

        schedule_delayed_work(, 1);

Will move the timer on an housekeeping CPU, and schedule the work there.

Currently if a user enqueue a work item using schedule_delayed_work() the
used wq is "system_wq" (per-cpu wq) while queue_delayed_work() use
WORK_CPU_UNBOUND (used when a cpu is not specified). The same applies to
schedule_work() that is using system_wq and queue_work(), that makes use
again of WORK_CPU_UNBOUND.

This lack of consistentcy cannot be addressed without refactoring the API.

=== Plan and future plans ===

This patchset is the first stone on a refactoring needed in order to
address the points aforementioned; it will have a positive impact also
on the cpu isolation, in the long term, moving away percpu workqueue in
favor to an unbound model.

These are the main steps:
1)  API refactoring (that this patch is introducing)
    -   Make more clear and uniform the system wq names, both per-cpu and
        unbound. This to avoid any possible confusion on what should be
        used.

    -   Introduction of WQ_PERCPU: this flag is the complement of WQ_UNBOUND,
        introduced in this patchset and used on all the callers that are not
        currently using WQ_UNBOUND.

        WQ_UNBOUND will be removed in a future release cycle.

        Most users don't need to be per-cpu, because they don't have
        locality requirements, because of that, a next future step will be
        make "unbound" the default behavior.

2)  Check who really needs to be per-cpu
    -   Remove the WQ_PERCPU flag when is not strictly required.

3)  Add a new API (prefer local cpu)
    -   There are users that don't require a local execution, like mentioned
        above; despite that, local execution yeld to performance gain.

        This new API will prefer the local execution, without requiring it.

=== Introduced Changes by this series ===

1) [P 1-2] Replace use of system_wq and system_unbound_wq

        system_wq is a per-CPU workqueue, but his name is not clear.
        system_unbound_wq is to be used when locality is not required.

        Because of that, system_wq has been renamed in system_percpu_wq, and
        system_unbound_wq has been renamed in system_dfl_wq.

2) [P 3] add WQ_PERCPU to remaining alloc_workqueue() users

        Every alloc_workqueue() caller should use one among WQ_PERCPU or
        WQ_UNBOUND. This is actually enforced warning if both or none of them
        are present at the same time.

        WQ_UNBOUND will be removed in a next release cycle.

=== For Maintainers ===

There are prerequisites for this series, already merged in the master branch.
The commits are:

128ea9f6ccfb6960293ae4212f4f97165e42222d ("workqueue: Add system_percpu_wq and
system_dfl_wq")

930c2ea566aff59e962c50b2421d5fcc3b98b8be ("workqueue: Add new WQ_PERCPU flag")


Thanks!

Marco Crivellari (3):
  drivers/block: replace use of system_wq with system_percpu_wq
  drivers/block: replace use of system_unbound_wq with system_dfl_wq
  drivers/block: WQ_PERCPU added to alloc_workqueue users

 drivers/block/aoe/aoemain.c   | 2 +-
 drivers/block/nbd.c           | 2 +-
 drivers/block/rbd.c           | 2 +-
 drivers/block/rnbd/rnbd-clt.c | 2 +-
 drivers/block/sunvdc.c        | 4 ++--
 drivers/block/virtio_blk.c    | 2 +-
 drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c | 2 +-
 7 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

-- 
2.51.0


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-09-18  8:59 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-09-05  8:51 [PATCH 0/3] block: replace wq users and add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue() users Marco Crivellari
2025-09-05  8:51 ` [PATCH 1/3] drivers/block: replace use of system_wq with system_percpu_wq Marco Crivellari
2025-09-05  8:51 ` [PATCH 2/3] drivers/block: replace use of system_unbound_wq with system_dfl_wq Marco Crivellari
2025-09-05  8:51 ` [PATCH 3/3] drivers/block: WQ_PERCPU added to alloc_workqueue users Marco Crivellari
2025-09-09 15:12 ` [PATCH 0/3] block: replace wq users and add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue() users Jens Axboe
2025-09-18  8:59   ` Marco Crivellari

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®