Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 00:14:06 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] kmod: Cleanups, simplifications, and make isolation
 friendly v3
Message-ID: <20150805221405.GB9411@lerouge>
References: <1438014440-20669-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com>
 <20150805171057.GA20238@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150805171057.GA20238@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1063
Lines: 26

On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 07:10:57PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/27, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > Hence those two debatable changes:
> >
> > _ We would like to use generic workqueues. System unbound workqueues are
> >   a very good candidate but they are not wide affine, only node affine.
> >   Now probably a node is enough to perform many parallel kmod jobs.
> >
> > _ We would like to remove the wait_for_helper kernel thread (UMH_WAIT_PROC
> >   handler) to use the workqueue. It means that if the workqueue blocks,
> >   and no other worker can take pending kmod request, we can be screwed.
> >   Now if we have 512 threads, this should be enough.
> 
> I think this series is fine. Feel free to add my reviewed-by.

Great!

Andrew, if you're ok with it, can you please apply this set?

Thanks a lot!
--
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/