lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/7 V6] workqueue: fix idle worker depletion
Hello, Lai.

On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 02:34:02AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> in 3.6 busy_worker_rebind() handle WORKER_REBIND bit,
> not WORKER_UNBOUND bit.
>
> busy_worker_rebind() takes struct work_struct *work argument, we have to
> add new patch to add a helper and restruct it at first.

What's wrong with just treating manager as busy. Factor out,
rebind_work scheduling from rebind_workers() and call it for busy
workers and the manager if it exists. manage_workers() only need to
call process_scheduled_works(). Wouldn't that work?

> worker_maybe_bind_and_lock() 's mean is very clear
> here. busy_worker_rebind() seems for busy workers, manager is not
> busy workers.

I don't know. It just seems unnecessarily wordy. If you don't like
reusing the busy worker path, how about just calling
maybe_bind_and_lock() unconditionally after locking manager_mutex? I
mean, can't it just do the following?

spin_unlock_irq(&gcwq->lock);

/*
* Explain what's going on.
*/
mutex_lock(&pool->manager_mutex);
if (worker_maybe_bind_and_lock(worker))
worker_clr_flags(worker, WORKER_UNBOUND);
ret = true;

Thanks.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-08 21:41    [W:1.205 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site