From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 676BD224B05; Mon, 2 Jun 2025 17:23:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1748885004; cv=none; b=DUtnxE2HbaJvwTF+vGKC6R0UlQ6XMz+gVe0NmWzApUvsxO1Lhc/8QY30z8M8sSi5tvVgFQ4TOTytaDIJ1IscWSf/ObnE3c6/eZyp8O/pO2VrzNKGfBm8sQRMJZ67G1VhxgSKvELTr9agjEozZlO+rE8fbwuGg+0Ns31IgUUhdqM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1748885004; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ga12tScn4AglgbH9jFsvtmQdSd0t5oIzNAxw0Gf5FBk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=EIcQRZezCDmaZal0xjEoqY8zQ7jrg4InW0elm2TffP/+/XD+VxA+zWZTbTwRAbm+nMgUhKvdzlbJw9plovQvoFfDsFMS7YcUbSkIbu2ZFGAeRKm/Rxva8vrMRqBAzkfCCnxO5A0Xv7jYwEdQu0Gxuh6C5drGuuEai/pqpYkF290= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=M+GVbc9e; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="M+GVbc9e" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC105C4CEEB; Mon, 2 Jun 2025 17:23:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1748885003; bh=ga12tScn4AglgbH9jFsvtmQdSd0t5oIzNAxw0Gf5FBk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=M+GVbc9ewpCrX1MAiudwe7b+vM6TGJRcKslK7oZGvfPvia/uGuyny2Je6k0paNdcw 0vjRsZhHf06/T8Aq/cWPYcADN7zONvQdJnLo/4Uf37M9767zs215FuMqLyXA2BijFm cBO/Tp6vKB5qIAZvmNak7uTBwSWF9ArQCKbEU2s1dazPr05BaGdN8VmBQVS8InUYRS 7jYg92/6MOk139fWknJ+0P+f8T3vDg9NmTiQklsZ4OIvWmjhGXRgv/wODE43WAtTmx DNeUMa+YzLRf11Cxi4q5ehxnondECWZ08RY7tv3xO0x0Im0Z4psU83t2I2mRMubDee mZNPD5xEYvOqg== Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2025 07:23:22 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Ryo Takakura Cc: song@kernel.org, yukuai3@huawei.com, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] md/raid5: unset WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE for raid5 unbound workqueue Message-ID: References: <20250601013702.64640-1-ryotkkr98@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250601013702.64640-1-ryotkkr98@gmail.com> On Sun, Jun 01, 2025 at 10:37:02AM +0900, Ryo Takakura wrote: > When specified with WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE, the workqueue doesn't > participate in concurrency management. This behaviour is already > accounted for WQ_UNBOUND workqueues given that they are assigned > to their own worker threads. > > Unset WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE as the use of flag has no effect when > used with WQ_UNBOUND. > > Signed-off-by: Ryo Takakura Acked-by: Tejun Heo Thanks. -- tejun