Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1360300
| From | Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFD] workqueue: WQ_MEM_RECLAIM usage in network drivers |
| Date | 2016-03-18 02:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <rdRyq-78i-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rdJhv-1oX-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 09:45:46 -0700 Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote: > Hello, > > Years ago, workqueue got reimplemented to use common worker pools > across different workqueues and a new set of more expressive workqueue > creation APIs, alloc_*workqueue() were introduced. The old > create_*workqueue() became simple wrappers around alloc_*workqueue() > with the most conservative parameters. The plan has always been to > examine each usage and convert to the new interface with parameters > actually required for the use case. > > One important flag to decide upon is WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, which declares > that the workqueue may be depended upon during memory reclaim and thus > must be able to make forward-progress even when further memory can't > be allocated without reclaiming some. Of the network drivers which > already use alloc_*workqueue() interface, some specify this flag and > I'm wondering what the guidelines should be here. > > * Are network devices expected to be able to serve as a part of > storage stack which is depended upon for memory reclamation? > I think they should be. Cached NFS pages can consume a lot of memory, and flushing them generally takes network device access. > * If so, are all the pieces in place for that to work for all (or at > least most) network devices? If it's only for a subset of NICs, how > can one tell whether a given driver needs forward progress guarantee > or not? > > * I assume that wireless drivers aren't and can't be used in this > fashion. Is that a correction assumption? > People do mount NFS over wireless interfaces. It's not terribly common though, in my experience. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFD] workqueue: WQ_MEM_RECLAIM usage in network drivers Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-03-17 17:50 +0100
Re: [RFD] workqueue: WQ_MEM_RECLAIM usage in network drivers Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net> - 2016-03-18 02:40 +0100
Re: [RFD] workqueue: WQ_MEM_RECLAIM usage in network drivers Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-03-18 21:50 +0100
Re: [RFD] workqueue: WQ_MEM_RECLAIM usage in network drivers "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> - 2016-03-18 22:30 +0100
Re: [RFD] workqueue: WQ_MEM_RECLAIM usage in network drivers Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-03-20 20:00 +0100
Re: [RFD] workqueue: WQ_MEM_RECLAIM usage in network drivers Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> - 2016-03-24 15:30 +0100
csiph-web