From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steven Whitehouse Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:48:42 +0100 Subject: [Cluster-devel] GFS2: Use new workqueue scheme In-Reply-To: <4C8F29D9.6060800@kernel.org> References: <1284402371.2733.17.camel@localhost> <4C8F29D9.6060800@kernel.org> Message-ID: <1284454122.2445.1.camel@localhost> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 09:52 +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On 09/13/2010 08:26 PM, Steven Whitehouse wrote: > >>From 29e8eb2a793cbf7ccba398b93f362a17f8cb4e6a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Steven Whitehouse > > Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:23:00 +0100 > > Subject: GFS2: Use new workqueue scheme > > The changes look good to me. > > Acked-by: Tejun Heo > > > - glock_workqueue = create_workqueue("glock_workqueue"); > > + glock_workqueue = alloc_workqueue("glock_workqueue", WQ_RESCUER | > > + WQ_HIGHPRI | WQ_FREEZEABLE, 0); > > Maybe explaning why HIGHPRI is necessary here would be a good idea? > Thanks for the review, I've updated that in the version now pushed into my -nmw GFS2 tree. > > diff --git a/fs/gfs2/main.c b/fs/gfs2/main.c > > index b1e9630..1c8bbf2 100644 > > --- a/fs/gfs2/main.c > > +++ b/fs/gfs2/main.c > > @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ static int __init init_gfs2_fs(void) > > > > error = -ENOMEM; > > gfs_recovery_wq = alloc_workqueue("gfs_recovery", > > - WQ_NON_REENTRANT | WQ_RESCUER, 0); > > + WQ_RESCUER | WQ_FREEZEABLE, 0); > > GFS2 was already using alloc_workqueue() before this patch? > > Thanks. > Yes, due to this patch: commit 6ecd7c2dd9f5dd4f6e8f65c8027159f9c73b0e4c Author: Tejun Heo Date: Tue Jul 20 22:09:02 2010 +0200 gfs2: use workqueue instead of slow-work :-) Steve.