[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240802211850.1211737-2-tj@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 11:18:17 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: jiangshanlai@...il.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...a.com,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] workqueue: Make wq_affn_dfl_set() use wq_online_cpumask
Other unbound pwq update paths are already using wq_online_cpumask which is
protected by wq_pool_mutex. Make wq_affn_dfl_set() to use wq_online_cpumask
too for synchronization and consistency.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index d56bd2277e58..6571e1f3c835 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -6909,18 +6909,16 @@ static int wq_affn_dfl_set(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp)
if (affn == WQ_AFFN_DFL)
return -EINVAL;
- cpus_read_lock();
mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
wq_affn_dfl = affn;
list_for_each_entry(wq, &workqueues, list) {
- for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
+ for_each_cpu(cpu, wq_online_cpumask)
unbound_wq_update_pwq(wq, cpu);
}
mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_mutex);
- cpus_read_unlock();
return 0;
}
--
2.45.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists