Re: [PATCH 2/5] kmod: Use system_unbound_wq instead of khelper

From	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH 2/5] kmod: Use system_unbound_wq instead of khelper
Date	2015-07-10 19:20 +0200
Message-ID	<pKK7U-mu-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<pKoqJ-3ul-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <pKoqJ-3ul-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <pKsNI-6ae-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <pKGQG-6Gh-27@gated-at.bofh.it> <pKHtp-791-45@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 09:20:46AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2015, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 
> > Now perhaps it is a good thing in the end. At least in nohz full it
> > doesn't change anything as we affine that workqueue too. But we must
> > be sure that a single NUMA node is enough to handle typical loads of
> > usermodehelper.
> 
> This is configurable right? So if you screw up you are responsible.

No it's not much configurable. The works are scheduled on tasks that are
node affine and you can't change that for system_unbound_wq. Only WQ_SYSFS
workqueues can be overriden on their no_numa property but even there that's
after the boot and most of the usermodehelper load goes on boot.
--
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/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [PATCH 2/5] kmod: Use system_unbound_wq instead of khelper Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 19:20 +0200
  Re: [PATCH 2/5] kmod: Use system_unbound_wq instead of khelper Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2015-07-10 20:00 +0200

csiph-web