[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aYUStZH9dBw_xZkh@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 11:59:17 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev,
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lgoncalv@...hat.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] workqueue: Allow to expose ordered workqueues via
sysfs
On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 02:39:13PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> +static umode_t wq_sysfs_is_visible(struct kobject *kobj, struct attribute *a, int n)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = kobj_to_dev(kobj);
> + struct workqueue_struct *wq = dev_to_wq(dev);
> +
> + /*
> + * Adjusting max_active breaks ordering guarantee. Changing it has no
> + * effect on BH worker. Limit max_active to RO in such case.
> + */
> + if (wq->flags & (WQ_BH | __WQ_ORDERED))
> + return 0444;
> + return a->mode;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct attribute_group wq_sysfs_group = {
> + .is_visible = wq_sysfs_is_visible,
> + .attrs = wq_sysfs_attrs,
> +};
> +__ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(wq_sysfs);
Yeah, this looks fine to me.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists