[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <863db036-c077-4b2e-a65e-af80ea3c2d24@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2025 17:05:35 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@...e.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: replace use of system_wq with system_percpu_wq
On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 06:00:04PM +0200, Marco Crivellari wrote:
> Hello Mark,
Please don't top post, reply in line with needed context. This allows
readers to readily follow the flow of conversation and understand what
you are talking about and also helps ensure that everything in the
discussion is being addressed.
> The above change is just a 1:1 conversion.
> system_wq is a per-cpu wq, so we only converted the name with the new one.
> system_wq is still present in the code, for a few release cycles.
> If the users don't care to be per-cpu, system_dfl_wq (the new unbound
> wq) can be used instead.
> This is just the first step of the conversion.
If we're going to convert everything I'd rather we do a sensible
conversion now than have multiple rounds of conversions. I strongly
suspect that most if not all of the current users don't know or care
that system_wq is percpu.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists