linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Workqueue: fs: replace use of system_wq and add WQ_PERCPU to 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: <20250821-hufeisen-heute-8005f698a331@brauner>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 13:23:06 +0200
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
To: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@...e.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, 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>, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Workqueue: fs: replace use of system_wq and add
 WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue users

On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 10:40:30AM +0200, Marco Crivellari wrote:
> Hello Tejun and Christian,
> 
> > I believe all the prerequisites were already in -rc1 and you should be able
> > to apply the series without pulling anything else. Marco, please correct me
> > if I'm mistaken.
> 
> Yes the prerequisites are in rc1.
> 
> But there are changes introduced in
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250815094510.52360-4-marco.crivellari@suse.com/
> ("Workqueue: WQ_PERCPU added to all the remaining users") that in my
> opinion should be present as well when this series and the others are
> merged.
> 
> For example, there are changes in __alloc_workqueue(), and also
> changes inside queue_work() (include/kernel/workqueue.h) that were
> added only in the "core" patches / series.
> 
> About queue_work() and the other functions, changes are made by
> ("Workqueue: replace use of system_unbound_wq with system_dfl_wq") and
> the related patch (about system_percpu_wq): it is mostly about add a
> pr_warn_once() if the old wq is used, and redirect on the new one.
> 
> Btw: in this fs branch I only have the prerequisites and this series,
> and I can compile and boot.

So either you can give me the fs specific changes without any additional
workqueue changes and I maintain a stable vfs-6.18.workqueue branch that
you can pull and base your additional changes on or Tejun gives me a
stable branch with the preparatory workqueue changes that I pull and use
as the base for the fs specific changes.

(Please note that vfs branches are usually pulled first thing during a
merge window.)

> 
> Thank you!
> 
> 
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 1:23 AM Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 01:23:26PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > > > If you agree with these changes, one option is pull the preparation changes from
> > > > Tejun's wq branch [1].
> > >
> > > I'll take it through the vfs-6.18.workqueue branch.
> > > Can I just pull the series from the list so we have all the lore links
> > > and the cover letter?
> >
> > I believe all the prerequisites were already in -rc1 and you should be able
> > to apply the series without pulling anything else. Marco, please correct me
> > if I'm mistaken.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --
> > tejun
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Marco Crivellari
> 
> L3 Support Engineer, Technology & Product
> 
> 
> 
> 
> marco.crivellari@...e.com