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 A33D2204F8B for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2025 19:18:01 +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=1738696681; cv=none; b=c/DJg1Ic6QjcGiSz0Mh1BYeEsldMVxFaxznNAyFXn7+U3p8todIn0tQeBi3vbVwh7YqJvdjuT2PKOa90xZpv87FKQTNteqn+BcBifsbyfljgpgETuBgGiT5ow2Mjc8RhowGPjnjH5i6buAOe66IjCPERwFIpR7y/DjRSnIKR93Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738696681; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cNPFS1s2yIl1xXyVg65xDIZe867yvpK9zmlgcaWK2XM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=B0H/HMjP7oMfZLqbzMkid2Wq9sWhxlVh81BbstsS9Z0P70RK1hKpf5ss5GhyMJTwdcSDQbkkzi7BGlZw1lnqErstV9BXixpoLrJ77qKB6Fy/T2nUK0MlTwrA1vb1BXNPnzE+OOLQhX6xohNxjv8+TWAT/OH9sQSpy7brS6nyUyM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Q2ZdumXu; 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="Q2ZdumXu" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAD08C4CEDF; Tue, 4 Feb 2025 19:18:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1738696681; bh=cNPFS1s2yIl1xXyVg65xDIZe867yvpK9zmlgcaWK2XM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Q2ZdumXuCC2Ickvz/elbUFKuVpzu5GD1Aqr6a+q9qVWI4aK9ZX4/QfiwttXRbvNGS C+FuR0tQb6r03nn9diICsZf5PkGu2T9+UadiZrtmuv9tvqCimvv9sY6HIchwS4YDtd SRy6RGhHPslFzvp8WG+dxS+Cw6eh4qP49U02IDnOO9FCYfC2DjkF9DtkVH54O+S2Lo WMKM4vkZZsyPySCZ93gZPhfTyQxbO03O3FcmoC3+GHYiOf9AZ9bNkeeQsFDa0gF3zY JRs6UAfoupksIcCvTpFwUouI+HMBtvuaEMjnh6nAWDDWfIIghfLBvF7lcWtL87tShp iOg8DrwgKwvqQ== Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 09:17:59 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Imran Khan Cc: jiangshanlai@gmail.com, haakon.bugge@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] workqueue: introduce queue_delayed_work_on_offline_safe Message-ID: References: <20250204113635.298634-1-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: <20250204113635.298634-1-imran.f.khan@oracle.com> On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 10:36:35PM +1100, Imran Khan wrote: > Currently users of queue_delayed_work_on, need to ensure > that specified cpu is and remains online. The failure to > do so may result in delayed_work getting queued on an > offlined cpu and hence never getting executed. > > The current users of queue_delayed_work_on, seem to ensure > the above mentioned criteria but for those, unknown amongst > current users or new users, who can't confirm to this > we need another interface. > > So introduce queue_delayed_work_on_offline_safe, which > is a wrapper around queue_delayed_work_on to ensure that > the specified cpu is and remains online. > > Signed-off-by: Imran Khan > Acked-by: Haakon Bugge So, idk, do we really need this? Can't we just add a debug warning which triggers when CPU goes down with delayed works queued on it? Thanks. -- tejun