From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mingming Cao <cmm@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' tree
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:58:56 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110325195856.GF2548@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110325144544.GF1409@htj.dyndns.org>
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 03:45:44PM +0100, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Both are about the same conversion but the one using alloc_workqueue()
> is better because 1. create_singlethread_workqueue() is going away and
> 2. it doesn't require strict ordering among queued works.
>
> Ted, what do you think?
Agreed. And it looks like Linus agreed as well:
diff --cc fs/ext4/super.c
index 203f9e4,ccfa686..22546ad
--- a/fs/ext4/super.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
@@@ -3511,12 -3514,7 +3516,12 @@@ static int ext4_fill_super(struct super
percpu_counter_set(&sbi->s_dirtyblocks_counter, 0);
no_journal:
- EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq = create_singlethread_workqueue("ext4-dio-
+ /*
+ * The maximum number of concurrent works can be high and
+ * concurrency isn't really necessary. Limit it to 1.
+ */
+ EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq =
- alloc_workqueue("ext4-dio-unwritten", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, 1);
++ alloc_workqueue("ext4-dio-unwritten", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM | WQ_UNBOUND, 1);
if (!EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq) {
printk(KERN_ERR "EXT4-fs: failed to create DIO workqueue\n");
goto failed_mount_wq;
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-25 19:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-25 1:56 linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' tree Stephen Rothwell
2011-03-25 14:45 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-25 16:30 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-03-25 19:58 ` Ted Ts'o [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-06-27 0:39 Stephen Rothwell
2023-06-27 6:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-06-27 7:26 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-06-07 0:27 Stephen Rothwell
2020-12-17 23:12 Stephen Rothwell
2020-10-20 23:03 Stephen Rothwell
2019-09-19 11:44 Mark Brown
2016-03-21 0:29 Stephen Rothwell
2013-08-13 1:33 Stephen Rothwell
2011-02-14 2:19 Stephen Rothwell
2010-10-28 0:45 Stephen Rothwell
2010-05-22 5:50 Stephen Rothwell
2009-09-17 1:56 linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus tree Stephen Rothwell
2009-09-17 13:22 ` Theodore Tso
2009-09-17 13:30 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-02-02 2:56 linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' tree Stephen Rothwell
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=20110325195856.GF2548@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.