[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230801105301.952042-1-atomlin@atomlin.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2023 11:53:01 +0100
From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...mlin.com>
To: tj@...nel.org
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, atomlin@...mlin.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] workqueue: Introduce PF_WQ_RESCUE_WORKER
> You really shouldn't be setting affinities on kworkers manually. There's
> no way of knowing which kworker is going to execute which workqueue.
> Please use the attributes API and sysfs interface to modify per-workqueue
> worker attributes. If that's not sufficient and you need finer grained
> control, the right thing to do is using kthread_worker which gives you a
> dedicated kthread that you can manipulate as appropriate.
Hi Tejun,
I completely agree. Each kworker has PF_NO_SETAFFINITY applied anyway.
If I understand correctly, only an unbound kworker can have their CPU
affinity modified via sysfs. The objective of this series was to easily
identify a rescuer kworker from user-mode.
Kind regards,
--
Aaron Tomlin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists