mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
To: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] wifi: rtlwifi: add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue users
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 00:52:51 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e3b57536924b4573ac61de3f24af8a9f@realtek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251113160605.381777-2-marco.crivellari@suse.com>

Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com> wrote:
> Currently if a user enqueues 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 consistency cannot be addressed without refactoring the API.
> For more details see the Link tag below.
> 
> alloc_workqueue() treats all queues as per-CPU by default, while unbound
> workqueues must opt-in via WQ_UNBOUND.
> 
> This default is suboptimal: most workloads benefit from unbound queues,
> allowing the scheduler to place worker threads where they’re needed and
> reducing noise when CPUs are isolated.
> 
> This continues the effort to refactor workqueue APIs, which began with
> the introduction of new workqueues and a new alloc_workqueue flag in:
> 
> commit 128ea9f6ccfb ("workqueue: Add system_percpu_wq and system_dfl_wq")
> commit 930c2ea566af ("workqueue: Add new WQ_PERCPU flag")
> 
> This change adds a new WQ_PERCPU flag to explicitly request
> alloc_workqueue() to be per-cpu when WQ_UNBOUND has not been specified.
> 
> With the introduction of the WQ_PERCPU flag (equivalent to !WQ_UNBOUND),
> any alloc_workqueue() caller that doesn’t explicitly specify WQ_UNBOUND
> must now use WQ_PERCPU.
> 
> Once migration is complete, WQ_UNBOUND can be removed and unbound will
> become the implicit default.
> 
> Suggested-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250221112003.1dSuoGyc@linutronix.de/
> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c
> index e26feb8de658..2786e4ee67eb 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c
> @@ -445,7 +445,7 @@ static int _rtl_init_deferred_work(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
>         struct rtl_priv *rtlpriv = rtl_priv(hw);
>         struct workqueue_struct *wq;
> 
> -       wq = alloc_workqueue("%s", 0, 0, rtlpriv->cfg->name);
> +       wq = alloc_workqueue("%s", WQ_PERCPU, 0, rtlpriv->cfg->name);

I think this driver should use WQ_UNBOUND as well as another patch in this
patchset. 


I feel most user scenarios should be WQ_UNBOUND. Could you share which case
uses WQ_PERCPU?


>         if (!wq)
>                 return -ENOMEM;
> 
> --
> 2.51.1


  reply	other threads:[~2025-11-17  0:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-11-13 16:06 [PATCH 0/2] add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue Marco Crivellari
2025-11-13 16:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] wifi: rtlwifi: add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue users Marco Crivellari
2025-11-17  0:52   ` Ping-Ke Shih [this message]
2025-11-17 10:02     ` Marco Crivellari
2025-11-18  0:41       ` Ping-Ke Shih
2025-11-18  9:26         ` Marco Crivellari
2025-11-13 16:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] wifi: rtw88: " Marco Crivellari
2026-01-22  1:29   ` Ping-Ke Shih
2026-01-22  8:59     ` Marco Crivellari

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=e3b57536924b4573ac61de3f24af8a9f@realtek.com \
    --to=pkshih@realtek.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marco.crivellari@suse.com \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /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®