From: Alexander Duyck <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Tejun Heo <email@example.com> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.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 11:23:26 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20181002174116.GG270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> On 10/2/2018 10:41 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > 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. 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. >> 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. 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? Thanks. - Alex _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linuxemail@example.com https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-02 18:28 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 25+ 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 ` [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 21:53 ` Tejun Heo 2018-09-26 22:05 ` Alexander Duyck 2018-09-26 22:09 ` Tejun Heo 2018-09-26 22:19 ` Alexander Duyck 2018-10-01 16:01 ` Tejun Heo 2018-10-01 21:54 ` Alexander Duyck 2018-10-02 17:41 ` Tejun Heo 2018-10-02 18:23 ` Alexander Duyck [this message] 2018-10-02 18:41 ` Tejun Heo 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 2018-09-27 0:31 ` Dan Williams 2018-09-27 15:16 ` Alexander Duyck 2018-09-27 19:48 ` Dan Williams 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 2018-09-27 0:48 ` Dan Williams 2018-09-27 15:27 ` Alexander Duyck 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 2018-09-28 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 2018-09-28 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 \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.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 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).