On 08/06, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 18:45 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 08/06, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > > > I suspect most of the barrier/flush semantics could be replaced with
> > > > completions from specific work items.
> > 
> > Hm. But this is exactly how it works?
> 
> Yes, barriers work by enqueueing work and waiting for that one work item
> to fall out, thereby knowing that all previous work has been completed.
> 
> My point was that most flushes are there to wait for a previously
> enqueued work item, and might as well wait for that one.
> 
> Let me try to illustrate: a regular pattern is, we enqueue work A and
> then flush the whole queue to ensure A is processed. So instead of
> enqueueing A, then B in the barrier code, and wait for B to pop out, we
> might as well wait for A to begin with.

This is a bit off-topic, but in that particular case we can do

        if (cancel_work_sync(&A))
                A->func(&A);

unless we want to execute ->func() on another CPU of course. It is easy to
implement flush_work() which waits for a single work_strcut, but it is not
so useful when it comes to schedule_on_each_cpu().

But I agree, flush_workqueue() should be avoided if possible. Not sure
it makes sense, but we can do something like below.

Oleg.

--- kernel/workqueue.c~ 2007-07-28 16:58:17.000000000 +0400
+++ kernel/workqueue.c  2007-08-06 20:33:25.000000000 +0400
@@ -572,25 +572,54 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(schedule_delayed_work_on);
  *
  * schedule_on_each_cpu() is very slow.
  */
+
+struct xxx
+{
+       atomic_t count;
+       struct completion done;
+       work_func_t func;
+};
+
+struct yyy
+{
+       struct work_struct work;
+       struct xxx *xxx;
+};
+
+static void yyy_func(struct work_struct *work)
+{
+       struct xxx *xxx = container_of(work, struct yyy, work)->xxx;
+       xxx->func(work);
+
+       if (atomic_dec_and_test(&xxx->count))
+               complete(&xxx->done);
+}
+
 int schedule_on_each_cpu(work_func_t func)
 {
        int cpu;
-       struct work_struct *works;
+       struct xxx xxx;
+       struct yyy *works;
 
-       works = alloc_percpu(struct work_struct);
+       init_completion(&xxx.done);
+       xxx.func = func;
+
+       works = alloc_percpu(struct yyy);
        if (!works)
                return -ENOMEM;
 
        preempt_disable();              /* CPU hotplug */
+       atomic_set(&xxx.count, num_online_cpus());
        for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
-               struct work_struct *work = per_cpu_ptr(works, cpu);
+               struct yyy *yyy = per_cpu_ptr(works, cpu);
 
-               INIT_WORK(work, func);
-               set_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING, work_data_bits(work));
-               __queue_work(per_cpu_ptr(keventd_wq->cpu_wq, cpu), work);
+               yyy->xxx = &xxx;
+               INIT_WORK(&yyy->work, yyy_func);
+               set_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING, work_data_bits(&yyy->work));
+               __queue_work(per_cpu_ptr(keventd_wq->cpu_wq, cpu), &yyy->work);
        }
        preempt_enable();
-       flush_workqueue(keventd_wq);
+       wait_for_completion(&xxx.done);
        free_percpu(works);
        return 0;
 }

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to