Re: [RFC PATCH] platform/x86: asus-tf103c-dock: Move long delayed work on system_dfl_long_wq

["Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2577 bytes --]

On Thu, 7 May 2026, Hans de Goede wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 7-May-26 16:39, Marco Crivellari wrote:
> > Currently the code enqueue work items using {queue|mod}_delayed_work(),
> > using system_long_wq. This workqueue should be used when long works are
> > expected and it is a per-cpu workqueue.
> > 
> > The function(s) end up calling __queue_delayed_work(), which set a global
> > timer that could fire anywhere, enqueuing the work where the timer fired.
> > 
> > Unbound works could benefit from scheduler task placement, to optimize
> > performance and power consumption. Long work shouldn't stick to a single
> > CPU.
> > 
> > Recently, a new unbound workqueue specific for long running work has
> > been added:
> > 
> >     c116737e972e ("workqueue: Add system_dfl_long_wq for long unbound works")
> > 
> > Since the workqueue work doesn't rely on per-cpu variables, there is no
> > obvious reason that justify the use of a per-cpu workqueue. So change
> > system_long_wq with system_dfl_long_wq so that the work may benefit from
> > scheduler task placement.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>
> 
> Thanks, patch looks good to me:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <johannes.goede@oss.qualcomm.com>
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Hans
> 
> 
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/platform/x86/asus-tf103c-dock.c | 6 ++++--
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/asus-tf103c-dock.c b/drivers/platform/x86/asus-tf103c-dock.c
> > index f09a3fc6524a..de683e17ce01 100644
> > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/asus-tf103c-dock.c
> > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/asus-tf103c-dock.c
> > @@ -669,7 +669,8 @@ static irqreturn_t tf103c_dock_hpd_irq(int irq, void *data)
> >  {
> >  	struct tf103c_dock_data *dock = data;
> >  
> > -	mod_delayed_work(system_long_wq, &dock->hpd_work, TF103C_DOCK_HPD_DEBOUNCE);
> > +	mod_delayed_work(system_dfl_long_wq, &dock->hpd_work,
> > +			 TF103C_DOCK_HPD_DEBOUNCE);
> >  	return IRQ_HANDLED;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -677,7 +678,8 @@ static void tf103c_dock_start_hpd(struct tf103c_dock_data *dock)
> >  {
> >  	enable_irq(dock->hpd_irq);
> >  	/* Sync current HPD status */
> > -	queue_delayed_work(system_long_wq, &dock->hpd_work, TF103C_DOCK_HPD_DEBOUNCE);
> > +	queue_delayed_work(system_dfl_long_wq, &dock->hpd_work,
> > +			   TF103C_DOCK_HPD_DEBOUNCE);
> >  }
> >  
> >  static void tf103c_dock_stop_hpd(struct tf103c_dock_data *dock)
> 

Hi Marco,

Is there some particular reason why this was sent as RFC?

-- 
 i.