linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] wifi: WQ_PERCPU added 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: <CAAofZF6uieKF463KnikeTWqKxjaaZ0SX8t5CpAsFWTkj8r1G7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 10:25:15 +0200
From: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@...e.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] wifi: WQ_PERCPU added to alloc_workqueue users

Hi Johannes,

On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 4:21 PM Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> So I don't know if I really need to tell you this, but generally the
> subject should be _imperative_, not describing what you did after the
> fact (i.e. "add WQ_PERCPU to ..." rather than "added ...")

Aha, thanks for the hint.

> > All existing users have been updated accordingly.
>
> Surely this is not _all_ existing users? :)

Yeah :-)

> > Suggested-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@...e.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/usb.c         | 2 +-
> >  drivers/net/wireless/quantenna/qtnfmac/core.c | 3 ++-
> >  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c   | 2 +-
> >  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/usb.c      | 3 ++-
> >  drivers/net/wireless/silabs/wfx/main.c        | 2 +-
> >  drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/bh.c           | 4 ++--
>
> These have different maintainers, please split up accordingly.

Sure, I will do it, like I did for the others.

> >  6 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/usb.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/usb.c
> > index 38bb501fc553..bfb21725d779 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/usb.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/usb.c
> > @@ -637,7 +637,7 @@ static struct ath6kl_usb *ath6kl_usb_create(struct usb_interface *interface)
> >       ar_usb = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ath6kl_usb), GFP_KERNEL);
> >       if (ar_usb == NULL)
> >               return NULL;
> > -     ar_usb->wq = alloc_workqueue("ath6kl_wq", 0, 0);
> > +     ar_usb->wq = alloc_workqueue("ath6kl_wq", WQ_PERCPU, 0);
> >       if (!ar_usb->wq) {
> >               kfree(ar_usb);
>
> I'd also think that WQ_PERCPU doesn't actually make sense for any of
> these instances, but for those that still have an active maintainer I'll
> defer to them, of course.

Thanks for the pointer!

-- 

Marco Crivellari

L3 Support Engineer, Technology & Product