Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 8 Sep 2012 12:02:04 -0700 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [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
| |