From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi1-x244.google.com (mail-oi1-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3332C21159809 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:31:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-x244.google.com with SMTP id m11-v6so729497oic.2 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:31:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180926214433.13512.30289.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20180926215143.13512.56522.stgit@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20180926215143.13512.56522.stgit@localhost.localdomain> From: Dan Williams Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:31:16 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 2/5] async: Add support for queueing on specific NUMA node List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" To: alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com Cc: "Brown, Len" , Linux-pm mailing list , Greg KH , linux-nvdimm , jiangshanlai@gmail.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List , zwisler@kernel.org, Pavel Machek , Tejun Heo , Andrew Morton , "Rafael J. Wysocki" List-ID: On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 2:51 PM Alexander Duyck wrote: > > This patch introduces four new variants of the async_schedule_ functions > that allow scheduling on a specific NUMA node. > > The first two functions are async_schedule_near and > async_schedule_near_domain which end up mapping to async_schedule and > async_schedule_domain but provide NUMA node specific functionality. They > replace the original functions which were moved to inline function > definitions that call the new functions while passing NUMA_NO_NODE. > > The second two functions are async_schedule_dev and > async_schedule_dev_domain which provide NUMA specific functionality when > passing a device as the data member and that device has a NUMA node other > than NUMA_NO_NODE. > > The main motivation behind this is to address the need to be able to > schedule device specific init work on specific NUMA nodes in order to > improve performance of memory initialization. > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck [..] > /** > - * async_schedule - schedule a function for asynchronous execution > + * async_schedule_near - schedule a function for asynchronous execution > * @func: function to execute asynchronously > * @data: data pointer to pass to the function > + * @node: NUMA node that we want to schedule this on or close to > * > * Returns an async_cookie_t that may be used for checkpointing later. > * Note: This function may be called from atomic or non-atomic contexts. > */ > -async_cookie_t async_schedule(async_func_t func, void *data) > +async_cookie_t async_schedule_near(async_func_t func, void *data, int node) > { > - return __async_schedule(func, data, &async_dfl_domain); > + return async_schedule_near_domain(func, data, node, &async_dfl_domain); > } > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(async_schedule); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(async_schedule_near); Looks good to me. The _near() suffix makes it clear that we're doing a best effort hint to the work placement compared to the strict expectations of _on routines. > > /** > - * async_schedule_domain - schedule a function for asynchronous execution within a certain domain > + * async_schedule_dev_domain - schedule a function for asynchronous execution within a certain domain > * @func: function to execute asynchronously > - * @data: data pointer to pass to the function > + * @dev: device that we are scheduling this work for > * @domain: the domain > * > - * Returns an async_cookie_t that may be used for checkpointing later. > - * @domain may be used in the async_synchronize_*_domain() functions to > - * wait within a certain synchronization domain rather than globally. A > - * synchronization domain is specified via @domain. Note: This function > - * may be called from atomic or non-atomic contexts. > + * Device specific version of async_schedule_near_domain that provides some > + * NUMA awareness based on the device node. > + */ > +async_cookie_t async_schedule_dev_domain(async_func_t func, struct device *dev, > + struct async_domain *domain) > +{ > + return async_schedule_near_domain(func, dev, dev_to_node(dev), domain); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(async_schedule_dev_domain); This seems unnecessary and restrictive. Callers may want to pass something other than dev as the parameter to the async function, and dev_to_node() is not on onerous burden to place on callers. _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm