From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH wq/for-4.5-fixes] workqueue: handle NUMA_NO_NODE for unbound pool_workqueue lookup
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:21:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160215182125.GG3965@htj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160215173346.GA26207@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Hello, Michal.
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 06:33:46PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 10-02-16 10:55:03, Tejun Heo wrote:
> [...]
> > --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> > +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> > @@ -570,6 +570,16 @@ static struct pool_workqueue *unbound_pwq_by_node(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
> > int node)
> > {
> > assert_rcu_or_wq_mutex_or_pool_mutex(wq);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * XXX: @node can be NUMA_NO_NODE if CPU goes offline while a
> > + * delayed item is pending. The plan is to keep CPU -> NODE
> > + * mapping valid and stable across CPU on/offlines. Once that
> > + * happens, this workaround can be removed.
>
> I am not sure this is completely true with the code as is currently.
> Don't wee also need to use cpu_to_mem to handle memoryless CPUs?
I'm not sure. I think we still wan to distinguish workers for a
memoryless node from its neighboring node with memory. We don't want
work items for the latter to be randomly distributed to the former
after all.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-15 18:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-02 14:44 mod_delayed_work() explosion due to 874bbfe6 Mike Galbraith
2016-02-03 14:37 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 16:32 ` Tejun Heo
2016-02-03 18:54 ` [PATCH wq/for-4.5-fixes] workqueue: handle NUMA_NO_NODE for unbound pool_workqueue lookup Tejun Heo
2016-02-03 18:55 ` Tejun Heo
2016-02-04 3:15 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-02-03 19:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-02-03 19:28 ` Tejun Heo
2016-02-04 2:12 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-02-04 8:40 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-10 15:55 ` Tejun Heo
2016-02-15 17:33 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-15 18:21 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2016-02-15 20:54 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-15 21:02 ` 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=20160215182125.GG3965@htj.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=umgwanakikbuti@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).