linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] nvmet: support unbound

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240719053116.GA21474@lst.de>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 07:31:16 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Ping Gan <jacky_gam_2001@....com>
Cc: hare@...e.de, sagi@...mberg.me, hch@....de, kch@...dia.com,
	linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ping.gan@...l.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] nvmet: support unbound_wq for RDMA and TCP

On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 05:14:49PM +0800, Ping Gan wrote:
> When running nvmf on SMP platform, current nvme target's RDMA and
> TCP use bounded workqueue to handle IO, but when there is other high
> workload on the system(eg: kubernetes), the competition between the 
> bounded kworker and other workload is very radical. To decrease the
> resource race of OS among them, this patchset will enable unbounded
> workqueue for nvmet-rdma and nvmet-tcp; besides that, it can also
> get some performance improvement. And this patchset bases on previous
> discussion from below session.

So why aren't we using unbound workqueues by default?  Who makea the
policy decision and how does anyone know which one to chose?