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 11:41:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181002184127.GH270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <be9081de-f186-b265-934d-78cec2a8792f@linux.intel.com>

Hello,

On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 11:23:26AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> >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.
> 
> Well if we could get wq_select_unbound_cpu doing the right thing
> based on node topology that would be most of my work solved right
> there. Basically I could just pass WQ_CPU_UNBOUND with the correct
> node and it would take care of getting to the right CPU.

Yeah, sth like that.  It might be better to keep the function to take
cpu for consistency as everything else passes around cpu.

> >>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.
> 
> So are you saying I should just return an error for now if somebody
> tries to use something other than an unbound workqueue with
> queue_work_near, and expect everyone else to just use queue_work_on
> for the other workqueue types?

Oh, I meant that let's not add a new interface for now and just use
queue_work_on() for your use case too.

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 11:41:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181002184127.GH270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <be9081de-f186-b265-934d-78cec2a8792f@linux.intel.com>

Hello,

On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 11:23:26AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> >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.
> 
> Well if we could get wq_select_unbound_cpu doing the right thing
> based on node topology that would be most of my work solved right
> there. Basically I could just pass WQ_CPU_UNBOUND with the correct
> node and it would take care of getting to the right CPU.

Yeah, sth like that.  It might be better to keep the function to take
cpu for consistency as everything else passes around cpu.

> >>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.
> 
> So are you saying I should just return an error for now if somebody
> tries to use something other than an unbound workqueue with
> queue_work_near, and expect everyone else to just use queue_work_on
> for the other workqueue types?

Oh, I meant that let's not add a new interface for now and just use
queue_work_on() for your use case too.

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 11:41:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181002184127.GH270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <be9081de-f186-b265-934d-78cec2a8792f-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>

Hello,

On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 11:23:26AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> >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.
> 
> Well if we could get wq_select_unbound_cpu doing the right thing
> based on node topology that would be most of my work solved right
> there. Basically I could just pass WQ_CPU_UNBOUND with the correct
> node and it would take care of getting to the right CPU.

Yeah, sth like that.  It might be better to keep the function to take
cpu for consistency as everything else passes around cpu.

> >>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.
> 
> So are you saying I should just return an error for now if somebody
> tries to use something other than an unbound workqueue with
> queue_work_near, and expect everyone else to just use queue_work_on
> for the other workqueue types?

Oh, I meant that let's not add a new interface for now and just use
queue_work_on() for your use case too.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-02 18:41 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
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 [this message]
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=20181002184127.GH270328@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 \
    --subject='Re: [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 1/5] workqueue: Provide queue_work_near to queue work near a given NUMA node' \
    /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

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.