From: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>,
Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com>,
Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>,
"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <linux@treblig.org>,
Jeff Chen <jeff.chen_1@nxp.com>,
Stefan Kerkmann <s.kerkmann@pengutronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] wifi: libertas: add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue users
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2025 12:24:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250922102407.186660-1-marco.crivellari@suse.com> (raw)
Hi!
Below is a summary of a discussion about the Workqueue API and cpu isolation
considerations. Details and more information are available here:
"workqueue: Always use wq_select_unbound_cpu() for WORK_CPU_UNBOUND."
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250221112003.1dSuoGyc@linutronix.de/
=== Current situation: problems ===
Let's consider a nohz_full system with isolated CPUs: wq_unbound_cpumask is
set to the housekeeping CPUs, for !WQ_UNBOUND the local CPU is selected.
This leads to different scenarios if a work item is scheduled on an isolated
CPU where "delay" value is 0 or greater then 0:
schedule_delayed_work(, 0);
This will be handled by __queue_work() that will queue the work item on the
current local (isolated) CPU, while:
schedule_delayed_work(, 1);
Will move the timer on an housekeeping CPU, and schedule the work there.
Currently if a user enqueue a work item using schedule_delayed_work() the
used wq is "system_wq" (per-cpu wq) while queue_delayed_work() use
WORK_CPU_UNBOUND (used when a cpu is not specified). The same applies to
schedule_work() that is using system_wq and queue_work(), that makes use
again of WORK_CPU_UNBOUND.
This lack of consistentcy cannot be addressed without refactoring the API.
=== Plan and future plans ===
This patchset is the first stone on a refactoring needed in order to
address the points aforementioned; it will have a positive impact also
on the cpu isolation, in the long term, moving away percpu workqueue in
favor to an unbound model.
These are the main steps:
1) API refactoring (that this patch is introducing)
- Make more clear and uniform the system wq names, both per-cpu and
unbound. This to avoid any possible confusion on what should be
used.
- Introduction of WQ_PERCPU: this flag is the complement of WQ_UNBOUND,
introduced in this patchset and used on all the callers that are not
currently using WQ_UNBOUND.
WQ_UNBOUND will be removed in a future release cycle.
Most users don't need to be per-cpu, because they don't have
locality requirements, because of that, a next future step will be
make "unbound" the default behavior.
2) Check who really needs to be per-cpu
- Remove the WQ_PERCPU flag when is not strictly required.
3) Add a new API (prefer local cpu)
- There are users that don't require a local execution, like mentioned
above; despite that, local execution yeld to performance gain.
This new API will prefer the local execution, without requiring it.
=== Introduced Changes by this series ===
1) [P 1] add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue() users
Every alloc_workqueue() caller should use one among WQ_PERCPU or
WQ_UNBOUND.
WQ_UNBOUND will be removed in a next release cycle.
Thanks!
Marco Crivellari (1):
wifi: libertas: WQ_PERCPU added to alloc_workqueue users
drivers/net/wireless/marvell/libertas/if_sdio.c | 3 ++-
drivers/net/wireless/marvell/libertas/if_spi.c | 3 ++-
drivers/net/wireless/marvell/libertas_tf/main.c | 2 +-
3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
--
2.51.0
next reply other threads:[~2025-09-22 10:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-22 10:24 Marco Crivellari [this message]
2025-09-22 10:24 ` [PATCH 1/1] wifi: libertas: WQ_PERCPU added to alloc_workqueue users Marco Crivellari
2025-09-22 11:33 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-22 13:32 ` Marco Crivellari
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=20250922102407.186660-1-marco.crivellari@suse.com \
--to=marco.crivellari@suse.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=francesco.dolcini@toradex.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=jeff.chen_1@nxp.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=johannes.berg@intel.com \
--cc=kvalo@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@treblig.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=s.kerkmann@pengutronix.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