Hi,

Am 26.01.2018 um 16:05 schrieb Tejun Heo:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 09:08:02AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
>> Not that you mention it ... Honestly though, wifi connections break all
>> the time, so not sure you'd really want that. But anyway, that's what
>> we have.
> I'd be a lot happier to remove WQ_MEM_RECLAIM from wireless drivers
> too, and glancing the code, it looked like there already are so many
> holes that whether having that flag or not shouldn't matter all that
> much.  It was just difficult for me to make a case for removing it
> preemptively.  If you're up for it, please be my guest.
I think, it is quite clear, why this error is produced, since in memory
reclaim, we should not synchronously flush unimportant work queues. I
think there could be valid use cases to have work queues with that flag
in wireless drivers, if the are used carefully. Therefore I suggest a
hint in the work queue documentation like:

"Check whether work_items on WQ_MEM_RECLAIM wq may actively delay memory
reclaim with network timeouts and check whether other work queues
without WQ_MEM_RECLAIM may be flushed within work_items of the queue, as
this will prioritize non-reclaiming work_items on the flushed queue the
same level as reclaiming work_items".

At least this can help for future usage, as it could have avoided my
error :-D

> Thanks.
>

-- 
M.Sc. Benjamin Beichler

Universität Rostock, Fakultät für Informatik und Elektrotechnik
Institut für Angewandte Mikroelektronik und Datentechnik

University of Rostock, Department of CS and EE
Institute of Applied Microelectronics and CE

Richard-Wagner-Straße 31
18119 Rostock
Deutschland/Germany

phone: +49 (0) 381 498 - 7278
email: benjamin.beich...@uni-rostock.de
www: http://www.imd.uni-rostock.de/


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to