Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@atomlin.com>
To:     tj@kernel.org
Cc:     peterz@infradead.org, atomlin@atomlin.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] workqueue: Introduce PF_WQ_RESCUE_WORKER
Date:   Tue,  1 Aug 2023 11:53:01 +0100
Message-Id: <20230801105301.952042-1-atomlin@atomlin.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZMhFUbL42Ycyc2tI@slm.duckdns.org>
References: <ZMhFUbL42Ycyc2tI@slm.duckdns.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

> You really shouldn't be setting affinities on kworkers manually. There's
> no way of knowing which kworker is going to execute which workqueue.
> Please use the attributes API and sysfs interface to modify per-workqueue
> worker attributes. If that's not sufficient and you need finer grained
> control, the right thing to do is using kthread_worker which gives you a
> dedicated kthread that you can manipulate as appropriate.

Hi Tejun,

I completely agree. Each kworker has PF_NO_SETAFFINITY applied anyway.
If I understand correctly, only an unbound kworker can have their CPU
affinity modified via sysfs. The objective of this series was to easily
identify a rescuer kworker from user-mode.


Kind regards,
-- 
Aaron Tomlin