From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
marco.crivellari@suse.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] workqueue: add a per-cpu backend for unbound pwqs
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 06:58:02 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <anDImojbi6lq0zUg@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <anCwxOHD7kJuy8Ka@gmail.com>
On Mon, Aug 03, 2026 at 09:35:16AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> a) There is one workqueue implementation -- what is today the unbound one --
> and percpu becomes one of its affinity settings rather than a separate
> type. The unbound_* helper names get renamed/removed once they stop
> being unbound-specific. So, `alloc_unbound_pwq()` becomes
> `alloc_pwq` and handle both cases.
>
> b) There is one pwq path, and alloc_and_link_percpu_pwqs() goes away.
>
> c) Which pool backs a pwq becomes a property of the attrs, resolved in
> alloc_unbound_pwq(), which hands out either the static percpu pool for
> that CPU or a hashed unbound one.
>
> d) Both pool types stay -- concurrency management only exists on the percpu
> ones -- so what gets merged is the machinery, not the pools.
>
> e) this ugly __WQ_PERCPU_POOLS goes away, WQ_PERCPU carries the
> intent, and the unbound path handles WQ_PERCPU directly. WQ_PERCPU
> and WQ_UNBOUND stop being mutually exclusive types and become
> a choice of backing, so the exclusivity check in alloc_workqueue()
> changes meaning or goes away.
Yeah, this makes sense to me.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-03 16:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-31 11:57 [PATCH 0/6] workqueue: base pwq pool release and nr_active on the backing pool Breno Leitao
2026-07-31 11:57 ` [PATCH 1/6] workqueue: factor out get_percpu_pool() Breno Leitao
2026-07-31 11:57 ` [PATCH 2/6] workqueue: factor out alloc_and_link_percpu_pwqs() Breno Leitao
2026-07-31 11:57 ` [PATCH 3/6] workqueue: release pwq pools by pool type Breno Leitao
2026-08-03 0:31 ` Tejun Heo
2026-08-03 14:02 ` Breno Leitao
2026-08-03 16:50 ` Tejun Heo
2026-07-31 11:57 ` [PATCH 4/6] workqueue: account nr_active by the backing pool Breno Leitao
2026-08-03 0:34 ` Tejun Heo
2026-08-03 14:19 ` Breno Leitao
2026-07-31 11:57 ` [PATCH 5/6] workqueue: add a per-cpu backend for unbound pwqs Breno Leitao
2026-08-03 0:36 ` Tejun Heo
2026-08-03 16:35 ` Breno Leitao
2026-08-03 16:58 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2026-07-31 11:57 ` [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: install per-cpu pwqs at creation for __WQ_PERCPU_POOLS Breno Leitao
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=anDImojbi6lq0zUg@slm.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marco.crivellari@suse.com \
/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®