From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 EBAAB1953BB for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:21:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736792498; cv=none; b=Q0cxBjuZ9V4dxPoY/+3czJxLuinG3pFaWO9esG6Xars9K9+502VSbnqNKVzhu7RUVh538wZDk9yBMF/fI/df6W5P5Cat1IxyYSiczzVQOi1tTNwBo8asOW6EGH2HhkwnNT+o7lNaD/vcYzjpqwFz+9QST99TVbjy6dheCRgRIdI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736792498; c=relaxed/simple; bh=98cNqwFhFB8N4tti7ow/WTACqO9RtfTRMazV1I3HPNM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YeSmnJsUbpyrvmPzLD+cX7ZyvivitBCd7tEKp1uFDP9VUPN4Ut/9ELA8+NA+NfT8hr5sg4jyIRIfdieDD+9Vyuva3GRZAx84rgmSWklrsbJ9BlZSMl9aZMk+lef2cfdo9SSqT1KP76/Xs5kDD0k26Sct3X8qcjtS9gVkKKicgWw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ttNyHMxS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ttNyHMxS" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D7CBC4CED6; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:21:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1736792497; bh=98cNqwFhFB8N4tti7ow/WTACqO9RtfTRMazV1I3HPNM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ttNyHMxSAxYOAKwe4U7+Gj2e15Nj5PqJcgpWGvmTNvZ/cWODvyKui19X/A7i6SNL9 YIDRl8ShSq+CxSdOrobC0GZlVGR05ZiF5Lr4netqywUN7L51k2DF3jP+cRA/7tQFc7 tKNk89JRZCl+V9UUmEKjuryZy6XafYr3rFYXa4LYVfOa9328RGWWlYVvzicpLAejF2 g+qDtJKBRQG0f5pk1YDdY4jJY50yf9yZKvC51ACMiiqb8kLD9q9BRQEyuFmVLuk4xY JpriilQOLnkwAtRUUXJZGy6L2dUH9Zsn6QMsCxHKL9oA580fgQLRButyIUs81lYW72 p9C3UVfcJ2kYw== Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:21:36 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Imran Khan Cc: jiangshanlai@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] workqueue: introduce queue_delayed_work_on_offline_safe. Message-ID: References: <20250113043540.2396426-1-imran.f.khan@oracle.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250113043540.2396426-1-imran.f.khan@oracle.com> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 03:35:40PM +1100, Imran Khan wrote: ... > I have kept the patch as RFC because from mailing list, > I could not find any users, of queue_delayed_work_on, > that is ending up queuing dwork on an offlined CPU. > We have some in-house code that is running into this problem, > and currently we are fixing it on caller side of queue_delayed_work_on. > Other users who run into this issue, can also use the approach of > fixing it on caller side or we can use the interface introduced > here for such use cases. I'm not sure how necessary this is. If the timer is okay to run on other CPUs, might as well just use queue_delayed_work(). Thanks. -- tejun