[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjMz_1mb+WJsPhfp5VBNrM=o8f-x2=6UW2eK5n4DHff9g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:19:01 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev, msnitzer@...hat.com, ignat@...udflare.com,
damien.lemoal@....com, bob.liu@...cle.com, houtao1@...wei.com,
peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
allen.lkml@...il.com, kernel-team@...a.com, Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] dm-verity: Convert from tasklet to BH workqueue
On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 at 13:32, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> I don't know, so just did the dumb thing. If the caller always guarantees
> that the work items are never queued at the same time, reusing is fine.
So the reason I thought it would be a good cleanup to introduce that
"atomic" workqueue thing (now "bh") was that this case literally has a
switch between "use tasklets' or "use workqueues".
So it's not even about "reusing" the workqueue, it's literally a
matter of making it always just use workqueues, and the switch then
becomes just *which* workqueue to use - system or bh.
In fact, I suspect there is very little reason ever to *not* just use
the bh one, and even the switch could be removed.
Because I think the only reason the "workqueue of tasklet" choice
existed in the first place was that workqueues were the "proper" data
structure, and the tasklet case was added later as a latency hack, and
everybody knew that tasklets were deprecated.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists