linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] thermal: Use freezable workqueue

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: <20110208093212.GA6558@htj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:32:12 +0100
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	ACPI Devel Mailing List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] thermal: Use freezable workqueue

Hello, Dmitry, Rafael.

On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 10:20:25AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > +	thermal_wq = alloc_workqueue("thermal", WQ_FREEZEABLE, 0);
> > 
> > Should probably be unbound as well.
> 
> Yup, thanks.

Hmm.. why should it be unbound?  Unbound wqs are primarily useful for
very long running (system daemon type) works which may also consume
considerable amount of cpu cycles.

> > FWIW, I would not mind if we had a global freezeable workqueue already
> > predefined. I could switch input_polldev and vmw_balloon to it and there
> > probably could be more users...
> 
> Hmm, OK.
> 
> Do you think we should add system_freezeable_wq to the set of predefined
> workqueues?

Oh, yeah, definitely.  I'll write up a patch.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/