linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ice: Unbind the workqueue

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <db2c96f3-c35d-42ee-a4e6-5233ccbac7bb@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2024 10:57:09 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, Tony Nguyen
	<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Larysa Zaremba
	<larysa.zaremba@...el.com>, "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org"
	<intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ice: Unbind the workqueue

On 9/23/24 00:24, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> The ice workqueue doesn't seem to rely on any CPU locality and should
> therefore be able to run on any CPU. In practice this is already
> happening through the unbound ice_service_timer that may fire anywhere
> and queue the workqueue accordingly to any CPU.
> 
> Make this official so that the ice workqueue is only ever queued to
> housekeeping CPUs on nohz_full.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
> ---
>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c
> index ea780d468579..70990f42ac05 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c
> @@ -5924,7 +5924,7 @@ static int __init ice_module_init(void)
>   
>   	ice_adv_lnk_speed_maps_init();
>   
> -	ice_wq = alloc_workqueue("%s", 0, 0, KBUILD_MODNAME);
> +	ice_wq = alloc_workqueue("%s", WQ_UNBOUND, 0, KBUILD_MODNAME);
>   	if (!ice_wq) {
>   		pr_err("Failed to create workqueue\n");
>   		return status;

Thank you for the patch, it would make sense for our iwl-next tree,
with such assumption:
Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>

@Tony, do you want it resent with target tree in the subject?