Hi Zaibo,
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 11:30:05AM +0800, Xu Zaibo wrote:
> > +struct iopf_queue *
> > +iopf_queue_alloc(const char *name, iopf_queue_flush_t flush, void *cookie)
> > +{
> > + struct iopf_queue *queue;
> > +
> > + queue = kzalloc(sizeof(*queue), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!queue)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * The WQ is unordered because the low-level handler enqueues faults by
> > + * group. PRI requests within a group have to be ordered, but once
> > + * that's dealt with, the high-level function can handle groups out of
> > + * order.
> > + */
> > + queue->wq = alloc_workqueue("iopf_queue/%s", WQ_UNBOUND, 0, name);
> Should this workqueue use 'WQ_HIGHPRI | WQ_UNBOUND' or some flags like this
> to decrease the unexpected
> latency of I/O PageFault here? Or maybe, workqueue will show an uncontrolled
> latency, even in a busy system.
I'll investigate the effect of these flags. So far I've only run on
completely idle systems but it would be interesting to add some
workqueue-heavy load in my tests.
Thanks,
Jean
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
