Re: [PATCH] ice: Unbind the workqueue

[Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>]

On 9/23/2024 1:57 AM, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
> On 9/23/24 00:24, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> The ice workqueue doesn't seem to rely on any CPU locality and should
>> therefore be able to run on any CPU. In practice this is already
>> happening through the unbound ice_service_timer that may fire anywhere
>> and queue the workqueue accordingly to any CPU.
>>
>> Make this official so that the ice workqueue is only ever queued to
>> housekeeping CPUs on nohz_full.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c 
>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c
>> index ea780d468579..70990f42ac05 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c
>> @@ -5924,7 +5924,7 @@ static int __init ice_module_init(void)
>>       ice_adv_lnk_speed_maps_init();
>> -    ice_wq = alloc_workqueue("%s", 0, 0, KBUILD_MODNAME);
>> +    ice_wq = alloc_workqueue("%s", WQ_UNBOUND, 0, KBUILD_MODNAME);
>>       if (!ice_wq) {
>>           pr_err("Failed to create workqueue\n");
>>           return status;
> 
> Thank you for the patch, it would make sense for our iwl-next tree,
> with such assumption:
> Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
> 
> @Tony, do you want it resent with target tree in the subject?

No, I can apply this as-is but please remember to designate a tree for 
future patches.

Thanks,
Tony