public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] workqueue: mark init_workqueues() as early_initcall()
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:55:22 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100730165522.22dc982b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100730215751.690706748@sbsiddha-MOBL3.sc.intel.com>

On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:57:37 -0700
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com> wrote:

> Mark init_workqueues() as early_initcall() and thus it will be initialized
> before smp bringup. init_workqueues() registers for the hotcpu notifier
> and thus it should cope with the processors that are brought online after
> the workqueues are initialized.
> 
> x86 smp bringup code uses workqueues and uses a workaround for the
> cold boot process (as the workqueues are initialized post smp_init()).
> Marking init_workqueues() as early_initcall() will pave the way for
> cleaning up this code.
> 

I sure hope this has been tested against linux-next. 
kernel/workqueue.c has been vastly changed and -tip doesn't know about
that.  linux-next should include -tip and is hence a better tree to
develop and test against.

AFAICT the main thing which needs checking is that the new
init_workqueues() doesn't do anything which requires that
sched_init_smp() has been executed.

The patch otherwise looks OK and killing that hack in the x86 code was
most merciful.

for_each_gcwq_cpu(), for_each_online_gcwq_cpu() and for_each_cwq_cpu()
make me cry.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-07-30 23:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-30 21:57 [patch 1/2] workqueue: mark init_workqueues() as early_initcall() Suresh Siddha
2010-07-30 21:57 ` [patch 2/2] x86, smp: use workqueues unconditionally during do_boot_cpu() Suresh Siddha
2010-07-30 23:55 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2010-07-31  0:48   ` [patch 1/2] workqueue: mark init_workqueues() as early_initcall() Suresh Siddha
2010-07-31 10:29     ` Tejun Heo
2010-07-31 10:27   ` Tejun Heo
2010-08-01  9:54   ` [PATCH wq#for-next] workqueue: explain for_each_*cwq_cpu() iterators Tejun Heo
2010-08-01 11:07 ` [PATCH] workqueue: mark init_workqueues() as early_initcall() Tejun Heo
2010-08-02 18:41   ` Suresh Siddha
2010-08-04 13:43     ` Tejun Heo

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=20100730165522.22dc982b.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /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