From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, fengguang.wu@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jmoyer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] writeback: replace custom worker pool implementation with unbound workqueue
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 23:32:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130318223244.GA11188@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130312150510.GF13152@quack.suse.cz>
On Tue 12-03-13 16:05:10, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 07-03-13 13:44:08, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Writeback implements its own worker pool - each bdi can be associated
> > with a worker thread which is created and destroyed dynamically. The
> > worker thread for the default bdi is always present and serves as the
> > "forker" thread which forks off worker threads for other bdis.
> >
> > there's no reason for writeback to implement its own worker pool when
> > using unbound workqueue instead is much simpler and more efficient.
> > This patch replaces custom worker pool implementation in writeback
> > with an unbound workqueue.
I realized there may be one issue - so far we have a clear identification
which thread works for which bdi in the thread name (flush-x:y naming).
That was useful when debugging things. Now with your worker pool this is
lost, am I right? Would it be possible to restore that?
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-18 22:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-07 21:44 [PATCHSET] writeback: convert writeback to unbound workqueue Tejun Heo
2013-03-07 21:44 ` [PATCH 1/4] implement current_is_workqueue_rescuer() Tejun Heo
2013-03-13 0:42 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-07 21:44 ` [PATCH 2/4] writeback: remove unused bdi_pending_list Tejun Heo
2013-03-12 12:02 ` Jan Kara
2013-03-07 21:44 ` [PATCH 3/4] writeback: replace custom worker pool implementation with unbound workqueue Tejun Heo
2013-03-12 15:05 ` Jan Kara
2013-03-18 22:32 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2013-03-18 22:35 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-19 15:46 ` Jan Kara
2013-03-19 17:28 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-21 1:57 ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-21 5:07 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-21 11:32 ` Jan Kara
2013-03-21 13:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-03-21 18:37 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-07 21:44 ` [PATCH 4/4] writeback: expose the bdi_wq workqueue Tejun Heo
2013-03-12 15:06 ` [PATCHSET] writeback: convert writeback to unbound workqueue Jens Axboe
2013-03-12 17:10 ` Tejun Heo
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=20130318223244.GA11188@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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).