From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yw1-xc41.google.com (mail-yw1-xc41.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E08E421AE30DB for ; Mon, 1 Oct 2018 09:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw1-xc41.google.com with SMTP id v198-v6so833033ywg.12 for ; Mon, 01 Oct 2018 09:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 09:01:42 -0700 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 1/5] workqueue: Provide queue_work_near to queue work near a given NUMA node Message-ID: <20181001160142.GE270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> References: <20180926214433.13512.30289.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20180926215138.13512.33146.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20180926215307.GA270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> <9b002bbb-3e6d-9e99-d8f9-36df4306093e@linux.intel.com> <20180926220957.GB270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" To: Alexander Duyck Cc: len.brown@intel.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zwisler@kernel.org, pavel@ucw.cz, rafael@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org List-ID: Hello, On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 03:19:21PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On 9/26/2018 3:09 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > I could just use queue_work_on probably, but is there any issue if I > am passing CPU values that are not in the wq_unbound_cpumask? That That should be fine. If it can't find any available cpu, it'll fall back to round-robin. We probably can improve it so that it can consider the numa distance when falling back. > was mostly my concern. Also for an unbound queue do I need to worry > about the hotplug lock? I wasn't sure if that was the case or not as Issuers don't need to worry about them. > I know it is called out as something to be concerned with using > queue_work_on, but in __queue_work the value is just used to > determine which node to grab a work queue from. It might be better to leave queue_work_on() to be used for per-cpu workqueues and introduce queue_work_near() as you suggseted. I just don't want it to duplicate the node selection code in it. Would that work? > I forgot to address your question about the advantages. They are > pretty significant. The test system I was working with was > initializing 3TB of nvdimm memory per node. If the node is aligned > it takes something like 24 seconds, whereas an unaligned core can > take 36 seconds or more. Oh yeah, sure, numa affinity matters quite a bit on memory heavy workloads. I was mistaken that you were adding adding numa affinity to per-cpu workqueues. Thanks. -- tejun _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm