[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZXnPVtISKQ2JFDNn@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2023 05:35:50 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
Cc: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...mlin.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] workqueue: Introduce PF_WQ_RESCUE_WORKER
Hello,
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 09:59:42AM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
> Something like the following then maybe?
>
> ---
> kernel/workqueue.c | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
> index 2989b57e154a7..ed73f7f80d57d 100644
> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> @@ -4405,6 +4405,12 @@ static void apply_wqattrs_commit(struct apply_wqattrs_ctx *ctx)
> link_pwq(ctx->dfl_pwq);
> swap(ctx->wq->dfl_pwq, ctx->dfl_pwq);
>
> + /* rescuer needs to respect wq cpumask changes */
> + if (ctx->wq->rescuer) {
> + kthread_bind_mask(ctx->wq->rescuer->task, ctx->attrs->cpumask);
> + wake_up_process(ctx->wq->rescuer->task);
> + }
> +
> mutex_unlock(&ctx->wq->mutex);
> }
I'm not sure kthread_bind_mask() would be safe here. The rescuer might be
running a work item. wait_task_inactive() might fail and we don't want to
change cpumask while the rescuer is active anyway.
Maybe the easiest way to do this is making rescuer_thread() restore the wq's
cpumask right before going to sleep, and making apply_wqattrs_commit() just
wake up the rescuer.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists