rcu.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@meta.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] rcu: WQ_PERCPU added to alloc_workqueue users
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2025 15:32:24 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aM1baMg5MDOQ37lp@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250918101752.2592512-5-paulmck@kernel.org>

Le Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 03:17:52AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney a écrit :
> From: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>
> 
> 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.
> 
> alloc_workqueue() treats all queues as per-CPU by default, while unbound
> workqueues must opt-in via WQ_UNBOUND.
> 
> This default is suboptimal: most workloads benefit from unbound queues,
> allowing the scheduler to place worker threads where they’re needed and
> reducing noise when CPUs are isolated.
> 
> This default is suboptimal: most workloads benefit from unbound queues,
> allowing the scheduler to place worker threads where they’re needed and
> reducing noise when CPUs are isolated.
> 
> This patch adds a new WQ_PERCPU flag to explicitly request the use of
> the per-CPU behavior. Both flags coexist for one release cycle to allow
> callers to transition their calls.
> 
> Once migration is complete, WQ_UNBOUND can be removed and unbound will
> become the implicit default.
> 
> With the introduction of the WQ_PERCPU flag (equivalent to !WQ_UNBOUND),
> any alloc_workqueue() caller that doesn’t explicitly specify WQ_UNBOUND
> must now use WQ_PERCPU.
> 
> All existing users have been updated accordingly.
> 
> Suggested-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
> ---
>  kernel/rcu/tree.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> index 1291e0761d70ab..c51c4a0af6aa5e 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -4890,10 +4890,10 @@ void __init rcu_init(void)
>  	rcutree_online_cpu(cpu);
>  
>  	/* Create workqueue for Tree SRCU and for expedited GPs. */
> -	rcu_gp_wq = alloc_workqueue("rcu_gp", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, 0);
> +	rcu_gp_wq = alloc_workqueue("rcu_gp", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM | WQ_PERCPU, 0);
>  	WARN_ON(!rcu_gp_wq);
>  
> -	sync_wq = alloc_workqueue("sync_wq", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, 0);
> +	sync_wq = alloc_workqueue("sync_wq", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM | WQ_PERCPU, 0);
>  	WARN_ON(!sync_wq);

sync_wq could be unbound as it's not dealing with per-cpu data.

Thanks.

>  
>  	/* Respect if explicitly disabled via a boot parameter. */
> -- 
> 2.40.1
> 
> 

-- 
Frederic Weisbecker
SUSE Labs

      reply	other threads:[~2025-09-19 13:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-16  0:01 [PATCH 0/3] Miscellaneous RCU updates for v6.18 Paul E. McKenney
2025-08-16  0:01 ` [PATCH 1/3] rcu: Document that rcu_barrier() hurries lazy callbacks Paul E. McKenney
2025-08-16  0:01 ` [PATCH 2/3] rcu: Remove local_irq_save/restore() in rcu_preempt_deferred_qs_handler() Paul E. McKenney
2025-08-16  0:01 ` [PATCH 3/3] rculist: move list_for_each_rcu() to where it belongs Paul E. McKenney
2025-09-18 10:17 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] Miscellaneous RCU updates for v6.18 Paul E. McKenney
2025-09-18 10:17   ` [PATCH v2 1/5] rcu: Document that rcu_barrier() hurries lazy callbacks Paul E. McKenney
2025-09-18 10:17   ` [PATCH v2 2/5] rcu: Remove local_irq_save/restore() in rcu_preempt_deferred_qs_handler() Paul E. McKenney
2025-09-18 10:17   ` [PATCH v2 3/5] rculist: move list_for_each_rcu() to where it belongs Paul E. McKenney
2025-09-18 10:17   ` [PATCH v2 4/5] rcu: replace use of system_wq with system_percpu_wq Paul E. McKenney
2025-09-18 10:17   ` [PATCH v2 5/5] rcu: WQ_PERCPU added to alloc_workqueue users Paul E. McKenney
2025-09-19 13:32     ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]

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=aM1baMg5MDOQ37lp@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marco.crivellari@suse.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).