Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-123493-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240327160314.9982-1-apais@linux.microsoft.com>
 <20240327160314.9982-7-apais@linux.microsoft.com> <ZgRePyo2zC4A1Fp4@mail.minyard.net>
 <CAOMdWS+1AFxEqmACiBYzPHc+q0Ut6hp15tdV50JHvfVeUNCGQw@mail.gmail.com> <ZgXDmx1HvujsMYAR@mail.minyard.net>
In-Reply-To: <ZgXDmx1HvujsMYAR@mail.minyard.net>
From: Allen <allen.lkml@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:41:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOMdWS+nB5EENp_Vb=k1j77nrch5JgbZP2XYPJ2ieTja14zB0w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] ipmi: Convert from tasklet to BH workqueue
To: minyard@acm.org
Cc: Allen Pais <apais@linux.microsoft.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, 
	keescook@chromium.org, vkoul@kernel.org, marcan@marcan.st, sven@svenpeter.dev, 
	florian.fainelli@broadcom.com, rjui@broadcom.com, sbranden@broadcom.com, 
	paul@crapouillou.net, Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com, 
	manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org, vireshk@kernel.org, Frank.Li@nxp.com, 
	leoyang.li@nxp.com, zw@zh-kernel.org, wangzhou1@hisilicon.com, 
	haijie1@huawei.com, shawnguo@kernel.org, s.hauer@pengutronix.de, 
	sean.wang@mediatek.com, matthias.bgg@gmail.com, 
	angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com, afaerber@suse.de, 
	logang@deltatee.com, daniel@zonque.org, haojian.zhuang@gmail.com, 
	robert.jarzmik@free.fr, andersson@kernel.org, konrad.dybcio@linaro.org, 
	orsonzhai@gmail.com, baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, zhang.lyra@gmail.com, 
	patrice.chotard@foss.st.com, linus.walleij@linaro.org, wens@csie.org, 
	jernej.skrabec@gmail.com, peter.ujfalusi@gmail.com, kys@microsoft.com, 
	haiyangz@microsoft.com, wei.liu@kernel.org, decui@microsoft.com, 
	jassisinghbrar@gmail.com, mchehab@kernel.org, maintainers@bluecherrydvr.com, 
	aubin.constans@microchip.com, ulf.hansson@linaro.org, manuel.lauss@gmail.com, 
	mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl, jh80.chung@samsung.com, oakad@yahoo.com, 
	hayashi.kunihiko@socionext.com, mhiramat@kernel.org, brucechang@via.com.tw, 
	HaraldWelte@viatech.com, pierre@ossman.eu, duncan.sands@free.fr, 
	stern@rowland.harvard.edu, oneukum@suse.com, 
	openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, 
	asahi@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, 
	linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, 
	imx@lists.linux.dev, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, 
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-actions@lists.infradead.org, 
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, 
	linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

> > > I believe that work queues items are execute single-threaded for a work
> > > queue, so this should be good.  I need to test this, though.  It may be
> > > that an IPMI device can have its own work queue; it may not be important
> > > to run it in bh context.
> >
> >   Fair point. Could you please let me know once you have had a chance to test
> > these changes. Meanwhile, I will work on RFC wherein IPMI will have its own
> > workqueue.
> >
> >  Thanks for taking time out to review.
>
> After looking and thinking about it a bit, a BH context is still
> probably the best for this.
>
> I have tested this patch under load and various scenarios and it seems
> to work ok.  So:
>
> Tested-by: Corey Minyard <cminyard@mvista.com>
> Acked-by: Corey Minyard <cminyard@mvista.com>
>
> Or I can take this into my tree.
>
> -corey

 Thank you very much. I think it should be okay for you to carry it into
your tree.

- Allen