lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] workqueue: don't alloc_percpu for single workqueue
On 01/21, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>
> allocating memory for every cpu for single workqueue is waste.

Yes, perhaps this makes sense, we can save a bit of per-cpu memory
for each single-threaded wq, and the patch looks correct.

> -static struct cpu_workqueue_struct *
> -init_cpu_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu)
> +static void init_cpu_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
> + struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq)
> {
> - struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq = per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_wq, cpu);
> -
> cwq->wq = wq;
> spin_lock_init(&cwq->lock);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cwq->worklist);
> init_waitqueue_head(&cwq->more_work);
> -
> - return cwq;
> }

Do we really need to change the prototype of init_cpu_workqueue()
and change then change __create_workqueue_key() accordingly?
Afaics, the only change in init_cpu_workqueue() we need is

- struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq = per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_wq, cpu);
+ struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq = wq_per_cpu(wq, cpu);

no?

> @@ -906,6 +907,13 @@ void destroy_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
> const struct cpumask *cpu_map = wq_cpu_map(wq);
> int cpu;
>
> + if (is_wq_single_threaded(wq)) {
> + cleanup_workqueue_thread(wq->cpu_wq);
> + kfree(wq->cpu_wq);
> + kfree(wq);
> + return;
> + }

again, not sure I understand why this change is needed. Afaics we
only need to use kfree(wq->cpu_wq) instead of free_percpu() if
it is single-threaded.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-01-21 13:23    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans