On 11/28, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 02:31:52PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > I _guess_ usermodehelper_init() should use WQ_SYSFS then, and in this case > > the user can write to wq_cpumask_store somewhere in /sys/. > > WTF is that and why are we creating alternative affinity interfaces when > sched_setaffinity() is a prefectly fine one?
Because there is no a simple workqueue/thread connection, I guess. And I do not understand why do you dislike this. For example. Please note that with the new design we can even kill khelper_wq and the ugly kmod_thread_locker hack (just in case, I am not saying that the patch which added kmod_thread_locker was ugly ;). We can just use one of the system_ WQ_UNBOUND workqueues which has the "large enough" max_active. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
