From: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
Subject: [Cluster-devel] GFS2: Use new workqueue scheme (try #2)
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2010 15:59:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1284044366.2468.52.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C88F3AA.3070201@kernel.org>
Hi,
On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 16:48 +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 09/09/2010 04:44 PM, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > Incidentally, this updated patch seems to run the postmark
> > test even faster than the previous version :-)
>
> Ah, cool. :-)
>
> Just one more thing.
>
> > - gfs2_delete_workqueue = create_workqueue("delete_workqueue");
> > + gfs2_delete_workqueue = alloc_workqueue("delete_workqueue", WQ_RESCUER |
> > + WQ_NON_REENTRANT |
> > + WQ_FREEZEABLE, 0);
>
> The original create_workqueue() is (cross-CPU) reentrant, so adding
> WQ_NON_REENTRANT there is adding one more restriction. Is this
> intentional?
>
The original code relied upon the submission code to prevent this from
happening. It seemed like a good idea to declare this explicitly, but
again it is not actually required, as such.
> > error = -ENOMEM;
> > gfs_recovery_wq = alloc_workqueue("gfs_recovery",
> > - WQ_NON_REENTRANT | WQ_RESCUER, 0);
> > + WQ_NON_REENTRANT | WQ_RESCUER |
> > + WQ_FREEZEABLE, 0);
>
> Looks like patch wasn't generated on a clean tree. The same question
> too. If it worked fine w/ create_workqueue() before, you don't need
> NON_REENTRANT.
>
> Thanks.
>
And the same here. The tree I'm using is my -nmw GFS2 tree since that is
where I'd intended to queue the resulting patch,
Steve.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-09 14:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-09 12:36 [Cluster-devel] GFS2: Use new workqueue scheme Steven Whitehouse
[not found] ` <4C88DEB9.90600@kernel.org>
2010-09-09 13:45 ` Steven Whitehouse
[not found] ` <4C88E5BD.6070400@kernel.org>
2010-09-09 14:06 ` Steven Whitehouse
2010-09-09 14:44 ` [Cluster-devel] GFS2: Use new workqueue scheme (try #2) Steven Whitehouse
[not found] ` <4C88F3AA.3070201@kernel.org>
2010-09-09 14:59 ` Steven Whitehouse [this message]
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=1284044366.2468.52.camel@localhost \
--to=swhiteho@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).