[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZRQtYnAhF2byr784@fedora>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2023 21:25:54 +0800
From: Wang Jinchao <wangjinchao@...sion.com>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
<linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <stone.xulei@...sion.com>
Subject: Issue: Can padata avoid dealing with CPU-related operations?
Hello, I have a few questions about the padata code I've been studying recently:
- Why does padata use the WQ_UNBOUND attribute of the workqueue? Because I've noticed a significant maintenance cost related to CPUs. Are there any specific benefits?
- In what scenarios is it necessary to specify a CPU for serial execution, or is ensuring the order sufficient?
In fact, the two questions can be summarized into one: Is it possible to avoid handling CPU-related operations to simplify the code logic?
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists