linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] workqueue: add workqueue.mayday_initial

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: <aRYH7NwIEdC2kM8Q@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2025 06:31:40 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: ying chen <yc1082463@...il.com>
Cc: corbet@....net, jiangshanlai@...il.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, laoar.shao@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: add workqueue.mayday_initial_timeout

Hello,

On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 10:34:43AM +0800, ying chen wrote:
> Processing work items one-by-one is indeed an excellent solution.
> However, wouldn't it also be necessary to provide a method for
> adjusting the mayday initial timeout?

Adding an interface like that isn't difficult but I'm not sure what that
would achieve. A rescuer is there to guarantee forward progress when the
system is under memory pressure and processing work items of the workqueue
may be required to free up memory. IOW, when that workqueue not making
forward progress can lead to system deadlock.

As such, this doesn't have that much system performance implications (aside
from the serialization effect that you raised). If rescuer is needed, the
system is in tatters anyway, especially in terms of latency response, so I'm
not sure what fine-tuning rescuer response time would help with.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun