Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 02 Jul 2010 11:32:01 +0200 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHSET] workqueue: implement and use WQ_UNBOUND |
| |
On 07/02/2010 11:17 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, David, Arjan. > > These four patches implement unbound workqueues which can be used as > simple execution context provider. I changed async to use it and will > also make fscache use it. This can be used by setting WQ_UNBOUND on > workqueue creation. Works queued to unbound workqueues are implicitly > HIGHPRI and dispatched to unbound workers as soon as resources are > available and the only limitation applied by workqueue code is > @max_active. IOW, for both async and fscache, things will stay about > the same. > > WQ_UNBOUND can serve the role of WQ_SINGLE_CPU. WQ_SINGLE_CPU is > dropped and replaced by WQ_UNBOUND. > > Arjan, I still think we'll be better off using bound workqueues for > async but let's first convert without causing behavior difference. > Either way isn't gonna result in any noticeable difference anyway. If > you're okay with the conversion, please ack it. > > David, this should work for fscache/slow-work the same way too. That > should relieve your concern, right? Oh, and Frederic suggested that > we would be better off with something based on tracing API and I > agree, so the debugfs thing is currently dropped from the tree. What > do you think?
Oops, forgot something. These four patches are on top of wq#for-next-candidate branch which is cmwq take#6 + four fix patches
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git for-next-candidate
and available in the following git tree.
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git review-cmwq
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |