2020-07-31 02:42:29

by Gao Xiang

Subject: [PATCH] erofs: remove WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE flag from unbound wq's

From: Gao Xiang <[email protected]>

The documentation [1] says that WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE is "meaningless" for
unbound wq. I remove this flag from places where unbound queue is
allocated. This is supposed to improve code readability.

[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/core-api/workqueue.html#flags
Signed-off-by: Maksym Planeta <[email protected]>
[Gao Xiang: since the original treewide patch [2] hasn't been merged
yet, handling the EROFS part only for the next cycle. ]
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <[email protected]>
---
fs/erofs/zdata.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/erofs/zdata.c b/fs/erofs/zdata.c
index 80bf09c4de09..9ac2723c11bf 100644
--- a/fs/erofs/zdata.c
+++ b/fs/erofs/zdata.c
@@ -43,13 +43,13 @@ void z_erofs_exit_zip_subsystem(void)
static inline int z_erofs_init_workqueue(void)
{
const unsigned int onlinecpus = num_possible_cpus();
- const unsigned int flags = WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_HIGHPRI | WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE;

/*
* no need to spawn too many threads, limiting threads could minimum
* scheduling overhead, perhaps per-CPU threads should be better?
*/
- z_erofs_workqueue = alloc_workqueue("erofs_unzipd", flags,
+ z_erofs_workqueue = alloc_workqueue("erofs_unzipd",
+ WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_HIGHPRI,
onlinecpus + onlinecpus / 4);
return z_erofs_workqueue ? 0 : -ENOMEM;
}
--
2.24.0

2020-07-31 03:49:47

by Chao Yu

Subject: Re: [PATCH] erofs: remove WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE flag from unbound wq's

On 2020/7/31 10:40, Gao Xiang via Linux-erofs wrote:
> From: Gao Xiang <[email protected]>
>
> The documentation [1] says that WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE is "meaningless" for
> unbound wq. I remove this flag from places where unbound queue is
> allocated. This is supposed to improve code readability.
>
> [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/core-api/workqueue.html#flags
> Signed-off-by: Maksym Planeta <[email protected]>
> [Gao Xiang: since the original treewide patch [2] hasn't been merged
> yet, handling the EROFS part only for the next cycle. ]
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
> Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <[email protected]>

Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>

Thanks,