From: "Yanjun.Zhu" <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>,
Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Replace use of system_unbound_wq with system_dfl_wq
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 10:24:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5de82ef1-3df6-44f8-a3c1-c6568c1110cf@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c5374d12-84ed-4298-92d3-90062988f68d@linux.dev>
On 3/17/26 7:38 AM, Zhu Yanjun wrote:
> 在 2026/3/16 13:13, Leon Romanovsky 写道:
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 04:40:23PM +0100, Marco Crivellari wrote:
>>> This patch continues the effort to refactor workqueue APIs, which
>>> has begun
>>> with the changes introducing new workqueues and a new
>>> alloc_workqueue flag:
>>>
>>> commit 128ea9f6ccfb ("workqueue: Add system_percpu_wq and
>>> system_dfl_wq")
>>> commit 930c2ea566af ("workqueue: Add new WQ_PERCPU flag")
>>>
>>> The point of the refactoring is to eventually alter the default
>>> behavior of
>>> workqueues to become unbound by default so that their workload
>>> placement is
>>> optimized by the scheduler.
>>>
>>> Before that to happen, workqueue users must be converted to the
>>> better named
>>> new workqueues with no intended behaviour changes:
>>>
>>> system_wq -> system_percpu_wq
>>> system_unbound_wq -> system_dfl_wq
>>>
>>> This way the old obsolete workqueues (system_wq, system_unbound_wq)
>>> can be
>>> removed in the future.
>>
>> I recall earlier efforts to replace system workqueues with per‑driver
>> queues,
>> because unloading a driver forces a flush of the entire system
>> workqueue,
>> which is undesirable for overall system behavior.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be better to introduce a local workqueue here and use
>> that instead?
>
> Thanks.
>
> 1.The initialization should be:
>
> my_wq = alloc_workqueue("my_driver_queue", WQ_UNBOUND |
> WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, 0);
> if (!my_wq)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> 2. The Submission should be:
>
> queue_work(my_wq, &my_work);
>
> 3. Destroy should be:
>
> destroy_workqueue()
>
> Thanks,
> Zhu Yanjun
Hi, Leon
The diff for a new work queue in rxe is as below. Please review it.
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_odp.c
b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_odp.c
index bc11b1ec59ac..03199fef47fb 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_odp.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_odp.c
@@ -545,7 +545,7 @@ static int rxe_ib_advise_mr_prefetch(struct ib_pd *ibpd,
work->frags[i].mr = mr;
}
- queue_work(system_unbound_wq, &work->work);
+ rxe_queue_aux_work(&work->work);
return 0;
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_task.c
b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_task.c
index f522820b950c..a2da699b969e 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_task.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_task.c
@@ -6,19 +6,36 @@
#include "rxe.h"
+/* work for rxe_task */
static struct workqueue_struct *rxe_wq;
+/* work for other rxe jobs */
+static struct workqueue_struct *rxe_aux_wq;
+
int rxe_alloc_wq(void)
{
- rxe_wq = alloc_workqueue("rxe_wq", WQ_UNBOUND, WQ_MAX_ACTIVE);
+ rxe_wq = alloc_workqueue("rxe_wq", WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_MEM_RECLAIM,
+ WQ_MAX_ACTIVE);
if (!rxe_wq)
return -ENOMEM;
+ rxe_aux_wq = alloc_workqueue("rxe_aux_wq",
+ WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, WQ_MAX_ACTIVE);
+ if (!rxe_aux_wq) {
+ destroy_workqueue(rxe_wq);
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ }
+
return 0;
}
void rxe_destroy_wq(void)
{
+ flush_workqueue(rxe_aux_wq);
+ destroy_workqueue(rxe_aux_wq);
+
+ flush_workqueue(rxe_wq);
destroy_workqueue(rxe_wq);
}
@@ -254,6 +271,14 @@ void rxe_sched_task(struct rxe_task *task)
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task->lock, flags);
}
+/* rxe_wq for rxe tasks. rxe_aux_wq for other rxe jobs.
+ */
+void rxe_queue_aux_work(struct work_struct *work)
+{
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(!rxe_aux_wq);
+ queue_work(rxe_aux_wq, work);
+}
+
/* rxe_disable/enable_task are only called from
* rxe_modify_qp in process context. Task is moved
* to the drained state by do_task.
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_task.h
b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_task.h
index a8c9a77b6027..e1c0a34808b4 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_task.h
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_task.h
@@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ int rxe_alloc_wq(void);
void rxe_destroy_wq(void);
+void rxe_queue_aux_work(struct work_struct *work);
/*
* init rxe_task structure
* qp => parameter to pass to func
Zhu Yanjun
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>>
>>> Link:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250221112003.1dSuoGyc@linutronix.de/
>>> Suggested-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_odp.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_odp.c
>>> b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_odp.c
>>> index bc11b1ec59ac..d440c8cbaea5 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_odp.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_odp.c
>>> @@ -545,7 +545,7 @@ static int rxe_ib_advise_mr_prefetch(struct
>>> ib_pd *ibpd,
>>> work->frags[i].mr = mr;
>>> }
>>> - queue_work(system_unbound_wq, &work->work);
>>> + queue_work(system_dfl_wq, &work->work);
>>> return 0;
>>> --
>>> 2.53.0
>>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-17 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-13 15:40 [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Replace use of system_unbound_wq with system_dfl_wq Marco Crivellari
2026-03-13 17:49 ` yanjun.zhu
2026-03-16 20:13 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-03-17 14:32 ` Marco Crivellari
2026-03-17 16:24 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-03-18 8:34 ` Marco Crivellari
2026-03-18 12:20 ` Marco Crivellari
2026-03-18 14:47 ` Zhu Yanjun
2026-03-18 15:02 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-03-18 15:08 ` Marco Crivellari
2026-03-17 14:38 ` Zhu Yanjun
2026-03-17 17:24 ` Yanjun.Zhu [this message]
2026-03-17 19:03 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-03-17 19:31 ` Yanjun.Zhu
2026-03-17 20:15 ` Yanjun.Zhu
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=5de82ef1-3df6-44f8-a3c1-c6568c1110cf@linux.dev \
--to=yanjun.zhu@linux.dev \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marco.crivellari@suse.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=zyjzyj2000@gmail.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