From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mingming Cao <cmm@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' tree
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:58:56 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110325195856.GF2548@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110325144544.GF1409@htj.dyndns.org>
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 03:45:44PM +0100, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Both are about the same conversion but the one using alloc_workqueue()
> is better because 1. create_singlethread_workqueue() is going away and
> 2. it doesn't require strict ordering among queued works.
>
> Ted, what do you think?
Agreed. And it looks like Linus agreed as well:
diff --cc fs/ext4/super.c
index 203f9e4,ccfa686..22546ad
--- a/fs/ext4/super.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
@@@ -3511,12 -3514,7 +3516,12 @@@ static int ext4_fill_super(struct super
percpu_counter_set(&sbi->s_dirtyblocks_counter, 0);
no_journal:
- EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq = create_singlethread_workqueue("ext4-dio-
+ /*
+ * The maximum number of concurrent works can be high and
+ * concurrency isn't really necessary. Limit it to 1.
+ */
+ EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq =
- alloc_workqueue("ext4-dio-unwritten", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, 1);
++ alloc_workqueue("ext4-dio-unwritten", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM | WQ_UNBOUND, 1);
if (!EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq) {
printk(KERN_ERR "EXT4-fs: failed to create DIO workqueue\n");
goto failed_mount_wq;
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-25 19:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-25 1:56 linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' tree Stephen Rothwell
2011-03-25 14:45 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-25 16:30 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-03-25 19:58 ` Ted Ts'o [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-06-27 0:39 Stephen Rothwell
2023-06-27 6:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-06-27 7:26 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-06-07 0:27 Stephen Rothwell
2020-12-17 23:12 Stephen Rothwell
2020-10-20 23:03 Stephen Rothwell
2019-09-19 11:44 Mark Brown
2016-03-21 0:29 Stephen Rothwell
2013-08-13 1:33 Stephen Rothwell
2011-02-14 2:19 Stephen Rothwell
2010-10-28 0:45 Stephen Rothwell
2010-05-22 5:50 Stephen Rothwell
2009-09-17 1:56 linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus tree Stephen Rothwell
2009-09-17 13:22 ` Theodore Tso
2009-09-17 13:30 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-02-02 2:56 linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' tree Stephen Rothwell
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=20110325195856.GF2548@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=tj@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).