[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <63321442-ee0d-c525-ba20-e99cf135399c@suse.com>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2023 13:58:22 +0200
From: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, jiangshanlai@...il.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/22] xen/pvcalls: Use alloc_ordered_workqueue() to
create ordered workqueues
On 21.04.23 04:50, Tejun Heo wrote:
> BACKGROUND
> ==========
>
> When multiple work items are queued to a workqueue, their execution order
> doesn't match the queueing order. They may get executed in any order and
> simultaneously. When fully serialized execution - one by one in the queueing
> order - is needed, an ordered workqueue should be used which can be created
> with alloc_ordered_workqueue().
>
> However, alloc_ordered_workqueue() was a later addition. Before it, an
> ordered workqueue could be obtained by creating an UNBOUND workqueue with
> @max_active==1. This originally was an implementation side-effect which was
> broken by 4c16bd327c74 ("workqueue: restore WQ_UNBOUND/max_active==1 to be
> ordered"). Because there were users that depended on the ordered execution,
> 5c0338c68706 ("workqueue: restore WQ_UNBOUND/max_active==1 to be ordered")
> made workqueue allocation path to implicitly promote UNBOUND workqueues w/
> @max_active==1 to ordered workqueues.
>
> While this has worked okay, overloading the UNBOUND allocation interface
> this way creates other issues. It's difficult to tell whether a given
> workqueue actually needs to be ordered and users that legitimately want a
> min concurrency level wq unexpectedly gets an ordered one instead. With
> planned UNBOUND workqueue updates to improve execution locality and more
> prevalence of chiplet designs which can benefit from such improvements, this
> isn't a state we wanna be in forever.
>
> This patch series audits all callsites that create an UNBOUND workqueue w/
> @max_active==1 and converts them to alloc_ordered_workqueue() as necessary.
>
> WHAT TO LOOK FOR
> ================
>
> The conversions are from
>
> alloc_workqueue(WQ_UNBOUND | flags, 1, args..)
>
> to
>
> alloc_ordered_workqueue(flags, args...)
>
> which don't cause any functional changes. If you know that fully ordered
> execution is not ncessary, please let me know. I'll drop the conversion and
> instead add a comment noting the fact to reduce confusion while conversion
> is in progress.
>
> If you aren't fully sure, it's completely fine to let the conversion
> through. The behavior will stay exactly the same and we can always
> reconsider later.
>
> As there are follow-up workqueue core changes, I'd really appreciate if the
> patch can be routed through the workqueue tree w/ your acks. Thanks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
> Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>
> Cc: Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>
> Cc: xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Acked-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Juergen
Download attachment "OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc" of type "application/pgp-keys" (3099 bytes)
Download attachment "OpenPGP_signature" of type "application/pgp-signature" (496 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists