Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755564Ab3CaSTj (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:19:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.220.52]:49790 "EHLO mail-pa0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752323Ab3CaSTi (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:19:38 -0400 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 11:19:31 -0700 From: Tejun Heo To: Viresh Kumar Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org, robin.randhawa@arm.com, Steve.Bannister@arm.com, Liviu.Dudau@arm.com, charles.garcia-tobin@arm.com, arvind.chauhan@arm.com, davem@davemloft.net, airlied@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 3/4] block: queue work on unbound wq Message-ID: <20130331181931.GA7533@htj.dyndns.org> References: <91239cde99aaba2715f63db1f88241d9f4a36e13.1364740180.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <91239cde99aaba2715f63db1f88241d9f4a36e13.1364740180.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1592 Lines: 37 Hello, Viresh. On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 08:01:46PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Block layer uses workqueues for multiple purposes. There is no real dependency > of scheduling these on the cpu which scheduled them. > > On a idle system, it is observed that and idle cpu wakes up many times just to > service this work. It would be better if we can schedule it on a cpu which the > scheduler believes to be the most appropriate one. > > This patch replaces normal workqueues with UNBOUND versions. Hmm.... so, we really don't want to unconditionally convert workqueues to unbound. Especially not kblockd. On configurations with multiple high iops devices with IRQ routing, having request completion runinng on the same CPU has significant performance advantages. We can't simply switch it to an unbound wokrqueue because it saves power on small arm configuration. Plus, I'd much prefer to be clearly marking the workqueues which would contribute to powersaving when converted to unbound at least until we can come up with a no-compromise solution which doesn't need to trade off between cache locality and powersaving. So, let's please introduce a new flag to mark these workqueues, say, WQ_UNBOUND_FOR_POWER_SAVE or whatever (please come up with a better name) and provide a compile time switch with boot time override. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/