linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] workqueue: don't alloc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090121121756.GA11942@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:17:56 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [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.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/