[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200213153645.GA11313@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 10:36:45 -0500
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To: Maksym Planeta <mplaneta@...inf.tu-dresden.de>
Cc: Zhou Wang <wangzhou1@...ilicon.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...hat.com,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Gao Xiang <xiang@...nel.org>,
Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: Remove WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE flag from unbound wq's
On Thu, Feb 13 2020 at 9:18am -0500,
Maksym Planeta <mplaneta@...inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote:
> The documentation [1] says that WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE is "meaningless" for
> unbound wq. I remove this flag from places where unbound queue is
> allocated. This is supposed to improve code readability.
>
> 1. https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/core-api/workqueue.html#flags
>
> Signed-off-by: Maksym Planeta <mplaneta@...inf.tu-dresden.de>
What the Documentation says aside, have you cross referenced with the
code? And/or have you done benchmarks to verify no changes?
Thanks,
Mike
Powered by blists - more mailing lists