From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0640817758; Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:57:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722560279; cv=none; b=sN6nhWSWRQginXUmVUALkRC5JFsmsRkKROam8wXWeOTMZlByjLcW0HKiWTF1rDJWkjVzVeW6ER/OW3Lbm6kSPWLWoy6lrdQatU4NSvz8y7n9jr4eYTKGHW8mewy3KCxxHX1Pqqgw4dhR5AFMmgj6kpdhyhLWYRliDypkFH8UEzc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722560279; c=relaxed/simple; bh=MTaSJyGBiIzdMGc84TjF9+v49GKSVnCpV8/HKiLEJVo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=udwZXn3UnSYayeq438g/3vpVBxS/1gOOorLIi5UGJPFyPxavDbw2xhKygNT3Z9KQdLiLokfAn9bqktcRQUl0o8dtxYnbdZm3EbeS1iPk4qEOSIsPhcleCtncq30lUQzalbw1UoJZR5mISmxnPIc9mtF8U4GXEbS3qoQNW+UbRSQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=QBg2oTFn; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="QBg2oTFn" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0EFE2C32786; Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:57:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1722560278; bh=MTaSJyGBiIzdMGc84TjF9+v49GKSVnCpV8/HKiLEJVo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=QBg2oTFnzq35PaCY+KM6z8eegHyrndOsaaeFoP7q+ZTnzWPRcfkCT5397TvNCPveY V3onjqNZn3QeYsho+3D77AbHeyqKdDTZCvPuC0Uw43Tsw1NI28LAF5jLVdaQgLXOMz pRnIXP2QmirdYXOSA1FR1XHDHzxN/6MHEsZVYQArfbMxgFLV1sryyHnVBkWgCyrKtW iPtMyU4W5tztq4HUipwxm+5zk1yeMnERVMfac9eJdXAAOhEYl5gnPwQt1f3SeKLFMD M6W1MO+FkTW3TACWGqenMNSMDUlwXLg6/mnksYMUYL7W6jpML3fA18Oc5SQe+/UKIi 2V9xzc9Jr0XpQ== Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:57:56 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Allen Cc: "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , jes@trained-monkey.org, kda@linux-powerpc.org, cai.huoqing@linux.dev, dougmill@linux.ibm.com, npiggin@gmail.com, christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, aneesh.kumar@kernel.org, naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com, nnac123@linux.ibm.com, tlfalcon@linux.ibm.com, cooldavid@cooldavid.org, marcin.s.wojtas@gmail.com, mlindner@marvell.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, nbd@nbd.name, sean.wang@mediatek.com, Mark-MC.Lee@mediatek.com, lorenzo@kernel.org, matthias.bgg@gmail.com, angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com, borisp@nvidia.com, bryan.whitehead@microchip.com, UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com, louis.peens@corigine.com, richardcochran@gmail.com, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acenic@sunsite.dk, linux-net-drivers@amd.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Sunil Goutham Subject: Re: [net-next v3 05/15] net: cavium/liquidio: Convert tasklet API to new bottom half workqueue mechanism Message-ID: <20240801175756.71753263@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20240730183403.4176544-1-allen.lkml@gmail.com> <20240730183403.4176544-6-allen.lkml@gmail.com> <20240731190829.50da925d@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:00:23 -0700 Allen wrote: > > Could you shed some light in the cover letter or this patch why > > tasklet_enable() is converted to enable_and_queue_work() at > > the face of it those two do not appear to do the same thing? > > With the transition to workqueues, the implementation on the workqueue side is: > > tasklet_enable() -> enable_work() + queue_work() > > Ref: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240227172852.2386358-7-tj@kernel.org/ > > enable_and_queue_work() is a helper which combines the two calls. > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=474a549ff4c989427a14fdab851e562c8a63fe24 > > Hope this answers your question. To an extent. tj says "unconditionally scheduling the work item after enable_work() returns %true should work for most users." You need to include the explanation of the conversion not being 1:1 in the commit message, and provide some analysis why it's fine for this user.