All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
Cc: len.brown@intel.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org,
	jiangshanlai@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	zwisler@kernel.org, pavel@ucw.cz, rafael@kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 1/5] workqueue: Provide queue_work_near to queue work near a given NUMA node
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 10:41:16 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181002174116.GG270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4eebc017-23a2-a26e-095c-66433061a141@linux.intel.com>

Hello,

On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 02:54:39PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> >It might be better to leave queue_work_on() to be used for per-cpu
> >workqueues and introduce queue_work_near() as you suggseted.  I just
> >don't want it to duplicate the node selection code in it.  Would that
> >work?
> 
> So if I understand what you are saying correctly we default to
> round-robin on a given node has no CPUs attached to it. I could
> probably work with that if that is the default behavior instead of
> adding much of the complexity I already have.

Yeah, it's all in wq_select_unbound_cpu().  Right now, if the
requested cpu isn't in wq_unbound_cpumask, it falls back to dumb
round-robin.  We can probably do better there and find the nearest
node considering topology.

> The question I have then is what should I do about workqueues that
> aren't WQ_UNBOUND if they attempt to use queue_work_near? In that

Hmm... yeah, let's just use queue_work_on() for now.  We can sort it
out later and users could already do that anyway.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, len.brown@intel.com,
	dave.jiang@intel.com, rafael@kernel.org,
	vishal.l.verma@intel.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, pavel@ucw.cz,
	zwisler@kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 1/5] workqueue: Provide queue_work_near to queue work near a given NUMA node
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 10:41:16 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181002174116.GG270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4eebc017-23a2-a26e-095c-66433061a141@linux.intel.com>

Hello,

On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 02:54:39PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> >It might be better to leave queue_work_on() to be used for per-cpu
> >workqueues and introduce queue_work_near() as you suggseted.  I just
> >don't want it to duplicate the node selection code in it.  Would that
> >work?
> 
> So if I understand what you are saying correctly we default to
> round-robin on a given node has no CPUs attached to it. I could
> probably work with that if that is the default behavior instead of
> adding much of the complexity I already have.

Yeah, it's all in wq_select_unbound_cpu().  Right now, if the
requested cpu isn't in wq_unbound_cpumask, it falls back to dumb
round-robin.  We can probably do better there and find the nearest
node considering topology.

> The question I have then is what should I do about workqueues that
> aren't WQ_UNBOUND if they attempt to use queue_work_near? In that

Hmm... yeah, let's just use queue_work_on() for now.  We can sort it
out later and users could already do that anyway.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Tejun Heo <tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
To: Alexander Duyck
	<alexander.h.duyck-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: len.brown-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
	linux-pm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	linux-nvdimm-hn68Rpc1hR1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org,
	jiangshanlai-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	zwisler-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org,
	pavel-+ZI9xUNit7I@public.gmane.org,
	rafael-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org,
	akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 1/5] workqueue: Provide queue_work_near to queue work near a given NUMA node
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 10:41:16 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181002174116.GG270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4eebc017-23a2-a26e-095c-66433061a141-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>

Hello,

On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 02:54:39PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> >It might be better to leave queue_work_on() to be used for per-cpu
> >workqueues and introduce queue_work_near() as you suggseted.  I just
> >don't want it to duplicate the node selection code in it.  Would that
> >work?
> 
> So if I understand what you are saying correctly we default to
> round-robin on a given node has no CPUs attached to it. I could
> probably work with that if that is the default behavior instead of
> adding much of the complexity I already have.

Yeah, it's all in wq_select_unbound_cpu().  Right now, if the
requested cpu isn't in wq_unbound_cpumask, it falls back to dumb
round-robin.  We can probably do better there and find the nearest
node considering topology.

> The question I have then is what should I do about workqueues that
> aren't WQ_UNBOUND if they attempt to use queue_work_near? In that

Hmm... yeah, let's just use queue_work_on() for now.  We can sort it
out later and users could already do that anyway.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-02 17:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-26 21:51 [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 0/5] Add NUMA aware async_schedule calls Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51 ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51 ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51 ` [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 1/5] workqueue: Provide queue_work_near to queue work near a given NUMA node Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:53   ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 21:53     ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 21:53     ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 22:05     ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 22:05       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 22:09       ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 22:09         ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 22:09         ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 22:19         ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 22:19           ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-01 16:01           ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-01 16:01             ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-01 16:01             ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-01 21:54             ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-01 21:54               ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-01 21:54               ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 17:41               ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2018-10-02 17:41                 ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 17:41                 ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 18:23                 ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 18:23                   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 18:23                   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 18:41                   ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 18:41                     ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 18:41                     ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 20:49                     ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 20:49                       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 20:49                       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51 ` [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 2/5] async: Add support for queueing on specific " Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27  0:31   ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27  0:31     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27  0:31     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27 15:16     ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 15:16       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 15:16       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 19:48       ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27 19:48         ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27 20:03         ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 20:03           ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51 ` [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 3/5] driver core: Probe devices asynchronously instead of the driver Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27  0:48   ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27  0:48     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27  0:48     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27 15:27     ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 15:27       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 15:27       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-28  2:48       ` Dan Williams
2018-09-28  2:48         ` Dan Williams
2018-09-28  2:48         ` Dan Williams
2018-09-26 21:51 ` [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 4/5] driver core: Use new async_schedule_dev command Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-28 17:42   ` Dan Williams
2018-09-28 17:42     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-28 17:42     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-26 21:52 ` [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 5/5] nvdimm: Schedule device registration on node local to the device Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:52   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:52   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-28 17:46   ` Dan Williams
2018-09-28 17:46     ` Dan Williams

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20181002174116.GG270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=zwisler@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.