linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] workqueue fixes for v4.3-rc5
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 16:24:48 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151014202448.GE12799@mtj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFyzsMYcRX3V5CEWB4Zb-9BuRGCjib3DMXuX5y9nBWiZ1w@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:10:33PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> At the same time, some of the same issues that are pushing people to
> move timers around (put idle cores to deeper sleeps etc) would also
> argue for moving delayed work around to other cpus if possible.
> 
> So I agree that there is a push to make timer cpu targets more dynamic
> in a way we historically didn't really have. At the same time, I think
> the same forces that want to move timers around would actually likely
> want to move delayed work around too...

I fully agree.  We gotta get this in order sooner or later.  I'll try
to come up with a transition plan.

> > * This makes queue_delayed_work() behave differently from queue_work()
> >   and when I checked years ago the local queueing guarantee was
> >   definitely being depended upon by some users.
> 
> Yes. But the delayed work really is different. By definition, we know
> that the current cpu is busy and active _right_now_, and so keeping
> work on that cpu isn't obviously wrong.
> 
> But it's *not* obviously right to schedule something on that
> particular cpu a few seconds from now, when it might be happily asleep
> and there might be better cpus to bother..

But in terms of API consistency, it sucks to have queue_work()
guarantee local queueing but not queue_delayed_work().  The ideal
situation would be updating both so that neither guarantees.  If that
turns out to be too painful, maybe we can rename queue_delayed_work()
so that it signifies its difference from queue_work().  Let's see.

> > I do want to get rid of the local queueing guarnatee for all work
> > items.  That said, I don't think this is the right way to do it.
> 
> Hmm. I guess that for being past rc5, taking your patch is the safe
> thing. I really don't like it very much, though.

Heh, yeah, I pondered about calling it a happy accident and just
sticking with the new behavior.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-10-14 20:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20151013214952.GB23106@mtj.duckdns.org>
2015-10-14 16:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-14 16:57   ` Tejun Heo
2015-10-14 17:36     ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-14 17:57       ` Christoph Lameter
2015-10-14 18:37         ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-14 18:58           ` Christoph Lameter
2015-10-14 19:01           ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-14 19:02       ` Tejun Heo
2015-10-14 19:16         ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-14 19:38           ` Tejun Heo
2015-10-14 20:10             ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-14 20:24               ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2015-10-19  3:51                 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-16 19:51               ` [PATCH] vmstat_update: ensure work remains on the same core Chris Metcalf
2015-10-16 19:54                 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-14 18:03   ` [GIT PULL] workqueue fixes for v4.3-rc5 Christoph Lameter
2015-10-14 18:40     ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-14 18:59       ` Christoph Lameter
2015-10-14 19:10         ` Linus Torvalds

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=20151014202448.GE12799@mtj.duckdns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
    --cc=shli@fb.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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