Hello,
On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 08:29:53AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> I mentioned a subtle use case that user would think it is supported
> since the comment doesn't disallow it.
>
> It is clear that the user expects
>the work must be called at least once after the API returns
>the work
Hello, Linus.
On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 10:30:29AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> - can we split this patch up, so that if somebody bisects a problem
> to it, we'll see if it's cgroup or aio that triggers it?
Will do.
> So I'd like to either just make the thing always just use
> WORK_CPU_UNBOUND,
On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 08:29:53AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:54 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:49:49AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:33 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >>
> >> > +/**
> >> > + * queue_rcu_work_on - queu
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:54 PM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:49:49AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:33 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>
>> > +/**
>> > + * queue_rcu_work_on - queue work on specific CPU after a RCU grace period
>> > + * @cpu: CPU number to
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 05:23:17PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 06:54:08AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > One downside of allowing RCU callback functions to sleep is that
> > one poorly written callback can block a bunch of other ones.
>
> Not to mention that we reall
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 06:54:08AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> One downside of allowing RCU callback functions to sleep is that
> one poorly written callback can block a bunch of other ones.
Not to mention that we really want the RCU callbacks to be simple and
short. Needing fancy things in t
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:49:49AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:33 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> > +/**
> > + * queue_rcu_work_on - queue work on specific CPU after a RCU grace period
> > + * @cpu: CPU number to execute work on
> > + * @wq: workqueue to use
> > + * @rwork: wo
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:33 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> +/**
> + * queue_rcu_work_on - queue work on specific CPU after a RCU grace period
> + * @cpu: CPU number to execute work on
> + * @wq: workqueue to use
> + * @rwork: work to queue
For many people, "RCU grace period" is clear enough, but not ALL
On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> This patch introduces rcu_work, a workqueue work variant which gets
> executed after a RCU grace period, and converts the open coded
> bouncing in fs/aio and kernel/cgroup.
So I like the concept, but I have two comments:
- can we split this p
There are cases where RCU callback needs to be bounced to a sleepable
context. This is currently done by the RCU callback queueing a work
item, which can be cumbersome to write and confusing to read.
This patch introduces rcu_work, a workqueue work variant which gets
executed after a RCU grace pe
10 matches
Mail list logo