| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:05:35 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
CC: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@...glemail.com>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] firmware_class: Move request_firmware_nowait() to
workqueues
On 03/27/12 15:55, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 28, 2012, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:21:27AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, March 28, 2012, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 02:28:30PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>>>> Oddly enough a work_struct was already part of the firmware_work
>>>>> structure but nobody was using it. Instead of creating a new
>>>>> kthread for each request_firmware_nowait() call just schedule the
>>>>> work on the long system workqueue. This should avoid some overhead
>>>>> in forking new threads when they're not strictly necessary.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it better to use alloc_workqueue() and not put these on the system
>>>>> long workqueue?
>>>> No, just use schedule_work() unless there are specific requirements
>>>> which can't be fulfilled that way (e.g. it's on memory allocation
>>>> path, may consume large amount of cpu cycles, ...)
>>> It may wait quite long.
>> That shouldn't matter. system_long_wq's name is a bit misleading at
>> this point. The only reason it's used currently is to avoid cyclic
>> dependency involving flush_workqueue(), which calls for clearer
>> solution anyway. So, yeap, using system_wq should be fine here.
> Good, thanks for the explanation.
>
> Stephen, care to respin?
>
Sure. We want system_wq instead of system_long_wq? If so let's use this
patch.
-----8<-- cut here -->8------
Subject: [PATCH] firmware_class: Move request_firmware_nowait() to workqueues
Oddly enough a work_struct was already part of the firmware_work
structure but nobody was using it. Instead of creating a new
kthread for each request_firmware_nowait() call just schedule the
work on the system workqueue. This should avoid some overhead
in forking new threads when they're not strictly necessary.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
---
drivers/base/firmware_class.c | 27 +++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
index ae00a2f..5401814 100644
--- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
+++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
@@ -16,10 +16,11 @@
#include <linux/interrupt.h>
#include <linux/bitops.h>
#include <linux/mutex.h>
-#include <linux/kthread.h>
+#include <linux/workqueue.h>
#include <linux/highmem.h>
#include <linux/firmware.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/sched.h>
#define to_dev(obj) container_of(obj, struct device, kobj)
@@ -630,19 +631,15 @@ struct firmware_work {
bool uevent;
};
-static int request_firmware_work_func(void *arg)
+static void request_firmware_work_func(struct work_struct *work)
{
- struct firmware_work *fw_work = arg;
+ struct firmware_work *fw_work;
const struct firmware *fw;
struct firmware_priv *fw_priv;
long timeout;
int ret;
- if (!arg) {
- WARN_ON(1);
- return 0;
- }
-
+ fw_work = container_of(work, struct firmware_work, work);
fw_priv = _request_firmware_prepare(&fw, fw_work->name, fw_work->device,
fw_work->uevent, true);
if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(fw_priv)) {
@@ -667,8 +664,6 @@ static int request_firmware_work_func(void *arg)
module_put(fw_work->module);
kfree(fw_work);
-
- return ret;
}
/**
@@ -694,7 +689,6 @@ request_firmware_nowait(
const char *name, struct device *device, gfp_t gfp, void *context,
void (*cont)(const struct firmware *fw, void *context))
{
- struct task_struct *task;
struct firmware_work *fw_work;
fw_work = kzalloc(sizeof (struct firmware_work), gfp);
@@ -713,15 +707,8 @@ request_firmware_nowait(
return -EFAULT;
}
- task = kthread_run(request_firmware_work_func, fw_work,
- "firmware/%s", name);
- if (IS_ERR(task)) {
- fw_work->cont(NULL, fw_work->context);
- module_put(fw_work->module);
- kfree(fw_work);
- return PTR_ERR(task);
- }
-
+ INIT_WORK(&fw_work->work, request_firmware_work_func);
+ schedule_work(&fw_work->work);
return 0;
}
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists