From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add queue_*() functions and prefer per-cpu workqueue and flag
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 10:18:49 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <afpQqfsAOmK8DU4D@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260505161658.401998-1-marco.crivellari@suse.com>
(cc'ing Breno)
Hello,
On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 06:16:56PM +0200, Marco Crivellari wrote:
> Actually schedule_work() and schedule_work_on() enqueue works using
> system_percpu_wq. The function name doesn't suggest it, on top of that,
> only the per-cpu version is present.
I was hoping to just retire schedule_work[_on]() and let people use e.g.
system_percpu_wq directly. Is that too verbose for casual users?
> Because of that, the following changes are introduced:
>
> - queue_{bound|unbound}_work() as future replacement of schedule_work()
If we do this, I think "percpu" is a lot clearer than "bound". percpu <->
(nothing) combination would be nice eventually but maybe that's too
confusing now. Does percpu <-> unbound combination sound weird?
...
> The Workqueue API currently do not distinguish between use case where
> locality is important for correctness and where is important for
> efficiency. So introduce WQ_PREFER_PERCPU and wq_prefer_percpu_wq, so
> that works who need to be per-cpu but don't strictly require it, can
> use such workqueue / workqueue flag.
What's requested through WQ_PREFER_PERCPU is simliar to what WQ_AFFN_CPU
does, so that might just work out. The only problem is that WQ_AFFN_CPU will
create nr_cpus workers to populate the per-cpu pods on boot. Maybe that's
not a problem if this gets used widely.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-05 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-05 16:16 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add queue_*() functions and prefer per-cpu workqueue and flag Marco Crivellari
2026-05-05 16:16 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] workqueue: Add queue_*() functions, future schedule_*() replacement Marco Crivellari
2026-05-05 16:16 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] workqueue: Add WQ_PREFER_PERCPU and system_prefer_percpu_wq Marco Crivellari
2026-05-05 20:18 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2026-05-06 13:40 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add queue_*() functions and prefer per-cpu workqueue and flag Breno Leitao
2026-05-07 10:25 ` Marco Crivellari
2026-05-07 21:27 ` Tejun Heo
2026-05-08 12:09 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-05-08 15:11 ` 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=afpQqfsAOmK8DU4D@slm.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marco.crivellari@suse.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.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