Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1201002 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 0/5] kmod: Cleanups, simplifications, and make isolation friendly v3

Started byOleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
First post2015-08-05 19:20 +0200
Last post2015-08-06 00:20 +0200
Articles 2 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH 0/5] kmod: Cleanups, simplifications, and make  isolation friendly v3 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-08-05 19:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 0/5] kmod: Cleanups, simplifications, and make isolation  friendly v3 Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 00:20 +0200

#1201002 — Re: [PATCH 0/5] kmod: Cleanups, simplifications, and make isolation friendly v3

FromOleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Date2015-08-05 19:20 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/5] kmod: Cleanups, simplifications, and make isolation friendly v3
Message-ID<pUawa-7PL-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
On 07/27, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> Hence those two debatable changes:
>
> _ We would like to use generic workqueues. System unbound workqueues are
>   a very good candidate but they are not wide affine, only node affine.
>   Now probably a node is enough to perform many parallel kmod jobs.
>
> _ We would like to remove the wait_for_helper kernel thread (UMH_WAIT_PROC
>   handler) to use the workqueue. It means that if the workqueue blocks,
>   and no other worker can take pending kmod request, we can be screwed.
>   Now if we have 512 threads, this should be enough.

I think this series is fine. Feel free to add my reviewed-by.

Oleg.

--
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/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1201280 — Re: [PATCH 0/5] kmod: Cleanups, simplifications, and make isolation friendly v3

FromFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Date2015-08-06 00:20 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/5] kmod: Cleanups, simplifications, and make isolation friendly v3
Message-ID<pUfcw-69Y-71@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1201002
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 07:10:57PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/27, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > Hence those two debatable changes:
> >
> > _ We would like to use generic workqueues. System unbound workqueues are
> >   a very good candidate but they are not wide affine, only node affine.
> >   Now probably a node is enough to perform many parallel kmod jobs.
> >
> > _ We would like to remove the wait_for_helper kernel thread (UMH_WAIT_PROC
> >   handler) to use the workqueue. It means that if the workqueue blocks,
> >   and no other worker can take pending kmod request, we can be screwed.
> >   Now if we have 512 threads, this should be enough.
> 
> I think this series is fine. Feel free to add my reviewed-by.

Great!

Andrew, if you're ok with it, can you please apply this set?

Thanks a lot!
--
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/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web