Hello, On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 02:54:39PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > >It might be better to leave queue_work_on() to be used for per-cpu > >workqueues and introduce queue_work_near() as you suggseted. I just > >don't want it to duplicate the node selection code in it. Would that > >work? > > So if I understand what you are saying correctly we default to > round-robin on a given node has no CPUs attached to it. I could > probably work with that if that is the default behavior instead of > adding much of the complexity I already have.
Yeah, it's all in wq_select_unbound_cpu(). Right now, if the requested cpu isn't in wq_unbound_cpumask, it falls back to dumb round-robin. We can probably do better there and find the nearest node considering topology. > The question I have then is what should I do about workqueues that > aren't WQ_UNBOUND if they attempt to use queue_work_near? In that Hmm... yeah, let's just use queue_work_on() for now. We can sort it out later and users could already do that anyway. Thanks. -- tejun _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
