linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] Workqueue: replace system wq and change alloc

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: <CAAofZF5U_fND+te4Sj_+TQPgZH_DDTneN2XLyY7a0niGBjGjaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 14:28:12 +0200
From: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@...e.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, 
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Workqueue: replace system wq and change
 alloc_workqueue callers

Hello Tejun,

Sorry for another email.

Another question / observation: I guess maintainers can't just pull
the changes and merge for the next release, if the workqueue changes
(e.g. changes in queue_work() etc) are not also merged, right?

I received a reply here, in the meantime, in "Workqueue: fs: replace
use of system_wq and add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue users"
(https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg5811817.html).

Thank you.

Marco

On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 8:04 PM Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Hello, Marco.
>
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 11:45:06AM +0200, Marco Crivellari wrote:
> > === Introduced Changes by this series ===
> >
> > 1) [P 1-2] Replace use of system_wq and system_unbound_wq
> >
> >               system_wq is a per-CPU workqueue, but his name is not clear.
> >               system_unbound_wq is to be used when locality is not required.
> >
> >               Because of that, system_wq has been renamed in system_percpu_wq, and
> >               system_unbound_wq has been renamed in system_dfl_wq.
> >
> > 2) [P 3] add WQ_PERCPU to remaining alloc_workqueue() users
> >
> >               Every alloc_workqueue() caller should use one among WQ_PERCPU or
> >               WQ_UNBOUND. This is actually enforced warning if both or none of them
> >               are present at the same time.
> >
> >               WQ_UNBOUND will be removed in a next release cycle.
> >
> > 3) [P 4] upgraded WQ_UNBOUND documentation
> >
> >               Added a note about the WQ_UNBOUND flag removal in a next release cycle.
> >
> >
> > Per-subsystem changes will be submitted in different series inolving also
> > maintainers.
>
> I'm afraid these are a bit intrusive for me to apply directly. Can you
> please split the patches in this and related serieses on subsystem tree
> boundaries? e.g. Network flows through the same tree but different
> filesystems often have their own trees. Please prefix the patch title with
> the respective subsystem's name. As the base patch is already in the master
> branch, you can ask each tree to take the patches. For trees that don't
> respond after a couple pings, we can route them through wq tree.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> tejun



-- 

Marco Crivellari

L3 Support Engineer, Technology & Product




marco.crivellari@...e.com