* [PATCH v2 0/1] module: replace wq users and add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue() users
@ 2025-09-18 8:55 Marco Crivellari
2025-09-18 8:55 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] module: replace use of system_wq with system_dfl_wq Marco Crivellari
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Marco Crivellari @ 2025-09-18 8:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-modules
Cc: Tejun Heo, Lai Jiangshan, Frederic Weisbecker,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Marco Crivellari, Michal Hocko,
Luis Chamberlain, Petr Pavlu
Hi!
Below is a summary of a discussion about the Workqueue API and cpu isolation
considerations. Details and more information are available here:
"workqueue: Always use wq_select_unbound_cpu() for WORK_CPU_UNBOUND."
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250221112003.1dSuoGyc@linutronix.de/
=== Current situation: problems ===
Let's consider a nohz_full system with isolated CPUs: wq_unbound_cpumask is
set to the housekeeping CPUs, for !WQ_UNBOUND the local CPU is selected.
This leads to different scenarios if a work item is scheduled on an isolated
CPU where "delay" value is 0 or greater then 0:
schedule_delayed_work(, 0);
This will be handled by __queue_work() that will queue the work item on the
current local (isolated) CPU, while:
schedule_delayed_work(, 1);
Will move the timer on an housekeeping CPU, and schedule the work there.
Currently if a user enqueue 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 consistentcy cannot be addressed without refactoring the API.
=== Plan and future plans ===
This patchset is the first stone on a refactoring needed in order to
address the points aforementioned; it will have a positive impact also
on the cpu isolation, in the long term, moving away percpu workqueue in
favor to an unbound model.
These are the main steps:
1) API refactoring (that this patch is introducing)
- Make more clear and uniform the system wq names, both per-cpu and
unbound. This to avoid any possible confusion on what should be
used.
- Introduction of WQ_PERCPU: this flag is the complement of WQ_UNBOUND,
introduced in this patchset and used on all the callers that are not
currently using WQ_UNBOUND.
WQ_UNBOUND will be removed in a future release cycle.
Most users don't need to be per-cpu, because they don't have
locality requirements, because of that, a next future step will be
make "unbound" the default behavior.
2) Check who really needs to be per-cpu
- Remove the WQ_PERCPU flag when is not strictly required.
3) Add a new API (prefer local cpu)
- There are users that don't require a local execution, like mentioned
above; despite that, local execution yeld to performance gain.
This new API will prefer the local execution, without requiring it.
=== Introduced Changes by this series ===
1) [P 1] Replace use of system_wq
system_wq is a per-CPU workqueue, but his name is not clear.
Because of that, system_wq has been renamed in system_percpu_wq.
The actual code doesn't benefit from a per-cpu wq, so instead of
the per-cpu wq, system_dfl_wq has been used.
Thanks!
---
Changes in v2:
- system_wq replaced by system_dfl_wq, the new unbound wq
Marco Crivellari (1):
module: replace use of system_wq with system_dfl_wq
kernel/module/dups.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--
2.51.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 1/1] module: replace use of system_wq with system_dfl_wq
2025-09-18 8:55 [PATCH v2 0/1] module: replace wq users and add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue() users Marco Crivellari
@ 2025-09-18 8:55 ` Marco Crivellari
2025-09-19 8:18 ` Petr Pavlu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Marco Crivellari @ 2025-09-18 8:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-modules
Cc: Tejun Heo, Lai Jiangshan, Frederic Weisbecker,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Marco Crivellari, Michal Hocko,
Luis Chamberlain, Petr Pavlu
Currently if a user enqueue 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 consistentcy cannot be addressed without refactoring the API.
This specific patch replace system_wq with system_dfl_wq, the new unbound
workqueue, because the users does not benefit from a per-cpu wq.
Suggested-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>
---
kernel/module/dups.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/module/dups.c b/kernel/module/dups.c
index bd2149fbe117..0b633f2edda6 100644
--- a/kernel/module/dups.c
+++ b/kernel/module/dups.c
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ static void kmod_dup_request_complete(struct work_struct *work)
* let this linger forever as this is just a boot optimization for
* possible abuses of vmalloc() incurred by finit_module() thrashing.
*/
- queue_delayed_work(system_wq, &kmod_req->delete_work, 60 * HZ);
+ queue_delayed_work(system_dfl_wq, &kmod_req->delete_work, 60 * HZ);
}
bool kmod_dup_request_exists_wait(char *module_name, bool wait, int *dup_ret)
@@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ void kmod_dup_request_announce(char *module_name, int ret)
* There is no rush. But we also don't want to hold the
* caller up forever or introduce any boot delays.
*/
- queue_work(system_wq, &kmod_req->complete_work);
+ queue_work(system_dfl_wq, &kmod_req->complete_work);
out:
mutex_unlock(&kmod_dup_mutex);
--
2.51.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] module: replace use of system_wq with system_dfl_wq
2025-09-18 8:55 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] module: replace use of system_wq with system_dfl_wq Marco Crivellari
@ 2025-09-19 8:18 ` Petr Pavlu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Petr Pavlu @ 2025-09-19 8:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marco Crivellari
Cc: Tejun Heo, Lai Jiangshan, Frederic Weisbecker,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Michal Hocko, Luis Chamberlain,
linux-kernel, linux-modules
On 9/18/25 10:55 AM, Marco Crivellari wrote:
> Currently if a user enqueue 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 consistentcy cannot be addressed without refactoring the API.
>
> This specific patch replace system_wq with system_dfl_wq, the new unbound
> workqueue, because the users does not benefit from a per-cpu wq.
>
> Suggested-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
--
Thanks,
Petr
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-09-19 8:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-09-18 8:55 [PATCH v2 0/1] module: replace wq users and add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue() users Marco Crivellari
2025-09-18 8:55 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] module: replace use of system_wq with system_dfl_wq Marco Crivellari
2025-09-19 8:18 ` Petr Pavlu
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox