On 25 September 2012 23:26, Tejun Heo <t...@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 04:06:08PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> +config MIGRATE_WQ
>> + bool "(EXPERIMENTAL) Migrate Workqueues to non-idle cpu"
>> + depends on SMP && EXPERIMENTAL
>> + help
>> + Workqueues queues work on current cpu, if the caller haven't passed a
>> + preferred cpu. This may wake up an idle CPU, which is actually not
>> + required. This work can be processed by any CPU and so we must select
>> + a non-idle CPU here. This patch adds in support in workqueue
>> + framework to get preferred CPU details from the scheduler, instead of
>> + using current CPU.
>
> I don't think it's a good idea to make behavior like this a config
> option. The behavior difference is subtle and may induce incorrect
> behavior.
Ok. Will remove it.
>> @@ -1066,8 +1076,9 @@ int queue_work(struct workqueue_struct *wq, struct
>> work_struct *work)
>> {
>> int ret;
>>
>> - ret = queue_work_on(get_cpu(), wq, work);
>> - put_cpu();
>> + preempt_disable();
>> + ret = queue_work_on(wq_select_cpu(), wq, work);
>> + preempt_enable();
>
> First of all, I'm not entirely sure this is safe. queue_work() used
> to *guarantee* that the work item would execute on the local CPU. I
> don't think there are many which depend on that but I'd be surprised
> if this doesn't lead to some subtle problems somewhere. It might not
> be realistic to audit all users and we might have to just let it
> happen and watch for the fallouts. Dunno, still wanna see some level
> of auditing.
Ok.
> Also, I'm wondering why this is necessary at all for workqueues. For
> schedule/queue_work(), you pretty much know the current cpu is not
> idle. For delayed workqueue, sure but for immediate scheduling, why?
This was done for below scenario:
- A cpu has programmed a timer and is IDLE now.
- CPU gets into interrupt handler due to timer and queues a work. As the
CPU is currently IDLE, we should queue this work to some other CPU.
I know this patch did migrate works in all cases. Will fix it by queuing work
only for this case in V2.
--
viresh
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
