Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Sender: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Nov 2020 07:45:47 -0500
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To:     Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@huawei.com>
Cc:     jiangshanlai@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Shiyuan Hu <hushiyuan@huawei.com>,
        Hewenliang <hewenliang4@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] workqueue: Kick a worker based on the actual
 activation of delayed works
Message-ID: <X75R+8CRIOyu1IzE@mtj.duckdns.org>
References: <3837a2ee-f3d5-2732-7d15-7e9616319f05@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3837a2ee-f3d5-2732-7d15-7e9616319f05@huawei.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 02:21:25PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
> In realtime scenario, We do not want to have interference on the
> isolated cpu cores. but when invoking alloc_workqueue() for percpu wq
> on the housekeeping cpu, it kick a kworker on the isolated cpu.
> 
>   alloc_workqueue
>     pwq_adjust_max_active
>       wake_up_worker
> 
> The comment in pwq_adjust_max_active() said:
>   "Need to kick a worker after thawed or an unbound wq's
>    max_active is bumped"
> 
> So it is unnecessary to kick a kworker for percpu's wq when invoking
> alloc_workqueue(). this patch only kick a worker based on the actual
> activation of delayed works.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@huawei.com>

Applied to wq/for-5.10-fixes w/ minor comment updates.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun