[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZYtHQc6pahtAUiJ8@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2023 06:36:01 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Naohiro.Aota@....com,
kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] workqueue: Move pwq->max_active to wq->max_active
On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 05:05:49AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Is that a problem tho? There's no execution order guarantee except for
> ordered workqueues which is not affected by this. In a later change, we
> switch to list of pending pwqs instead of work items and the issue ordering
> is lost anyway. This isn't a significant departure from previous behaviors
> either given that there has never been ordering across pwq boundaries.
Thought more about it and I was wrong. This introduces reordering within pwq
which is new and can break ordered workqueues. Will fix.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists