Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 15 Feb 2016 18:33:46 +0100 | From | Michal Hocko <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH wq/for-4.5-fixes] workqueue: handle NUMA_NO_NODE for unbound pool_workqueue lookup |
| |
On Wed 10-02-16 10:55:03, Tejun Heo wrote: [...] > --- a/kernel/workqueue.c > +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c > @@ -570,6 +570,16 @@ static struct pool_workqueue *unbound_pwq_by_node(struct workqueue_struct *wq, > int node) > { > assert_rcu_or_wq_mutex_or_pool_mutex(wq); > + > + /* > + * XXX: @node can be NUMA_NO_NODE if CPU goes offline while a > + * delayed item is pending. The plan is to keep CPU -> NODE > + * mapping valid and stable across CPU on/offlines. Once that > + * happens, this workaround can be removed.
I am not sure this is completely true with the code as is currently. Don't wee also need to use cpu_to_mem to handle memoryless CPUs?
> + */ > + if (unlikely(node == NUMA_NO_NODE)) > + return wq->dfl_pwq; > + > return rcu_dereference_raw(wq->numa_pwq_tbl[node]); > }
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c index c579dbab2e36..4785b895b9b5 100644 --- a/kernel/workqueue.c +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c @@ -1325,7 +1325,7 @@ static void __queue_work(int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq, if (!(wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)) pwq = per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwqs, cpu); else - pwq = unbound_pwq_by_node(wq, cpu_to_node(cpu)); + pwq = unbound_pwq_by_node(wq, cpu_to_mem(cpu)); /* * If @work was previously on a different pool, it might still be -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
| |