From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCHSET wq/for-3.10] workqueue: NUMA affinity for unbound workqueues Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 13:48:07 -0700 Message-ID: <20130325204807.GA26033@htj.dyndns.org> References: <1363737629-16745-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20130320185708.GB31256@htj.dyndns.org> <20130324185506.GA4378@htj.dyndns.org> <20130325191500.GA12767@htj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, axboe@kernel.dk, jack@suse.cz, fengguang.wu@intel.com, jmoyer@redhat.com, zab@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, davem@davemloft.net, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org To: Lai Jiangshan Return-path: Received: from mail-vc0-f171.google.com ([209.85.220.171]:64510 "EHLO mail-vc0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932238Ab3CYUsP (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:48:15 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130325191500.GA12767@htj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:15:00PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 11:55:06AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > > > the whole patchset is more complicated than my brain. > > > > It isn't that complex, is it? I mean, the difficult part - using > > multiple pwqs on unbound wq - already happened, and even that wasn't > > too complex as it in most part synchronized the behaviors between > > per-cpu and unbound workqueues. All that NUMA support is doing is > > mapping different pwqs to different issuing CPUs. > > Oh, BTW, please feel free to rebase your patchset on top of the > current wq/for-3.10. I'll take care of the conflicts with the numa > one, if there are any. Sorry, never mind. I'm cherry picking wq->mutex patches. Will apply the rebased versions in a couple hours. Let's base everything else on top of those. Thanks. -- tejun