Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 4 Feb 2026 16:19:28 +0000 | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] rust: add system_default() around the new system_dfl_wq | | From | Alice Ryhl <> |
| |
On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 04:50:36PM +0100, Marco Crivellari wrote: > The C code defines 2 new workqueues: system_percpu_wq and system_dfl_wq, > respectively the futures replacement for system_wq and system_unbound_wq. > > This change introduce system_default(), that use the new system_dfl_wq. > > system_unbound_wq will be replaced in a future release cycle and should > not be used. > > Suggested-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> > Signed-off-by: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com> > --- > rust/kernel/workqueue.rs | 14 ++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/rust/kernel/workqueue.rs b/rust/kernel/workqueue.rs > index 706e833e9702..adbecdb2b3a9 100644 > --- a/rust/kernel/workqueue.rs > +++ b/rust/kernel/workqueue.rs > @@ -968,11 +968,25 @@ pub fn system_long() -> &'static Queue { > /// Workers are not bound to any specific CPU, not concurrency managed, and all queued work items > /// are executed immediately as long as `max_active` limit is not reached and resources are > /// available. > +/// > +/// Note: `system_unbound_wq` will be removed in a future release cycle. Use `system_dfl_wq` instead. > pub fn system_unbound() -> &'static Queue { > // SAFETY: `system_unbound_wq` is a C global, always available. > unsafe { Queue::from_raw(bindings::system_unbound_wq) } > } > > +/// Returns the system unbound work queue (`system_dfl_wq`). > +/// > +/// Workers are not bound to any specific CPU, not concurrency managed, and all queued work items > +/// are executed immediately as long as `max_active` limit is not reached and resources are > +/// available. > +/// > +/// Note: `system_dfl_wq` will replace in a future release cycle `system_unbound_wq`. > +pub fn system_default() -> &'static Queue { > + // SAFETY: `system_dfl_wq` is a C global, always available. > + unsafe { Queue::from_raw(bindings::system_dfl_wq) }
I don't think we should use different naming than C.
Alice
|  |