Re: [PATCH] cgroup/cpuset: fix circular locking dependency

From: Tejun Heo
Date: Tue Jan 09 2018 - 10:38:04 EST


Hello, Paul.

On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 07:21:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > The code was previously using both system_power_efficient_wq and
> > system_workqueue (for the expedited path). I guess the options were
> > either using two workqueues or dropping POWER_EFFICIENT. I have no
> > idea how big an impact this will make or whether it'd even be
> > noticeable but maybe it'd be worthwhile to mention that in the
> > description?
>
> Good point! How about if I change the last paragraph of the commit
> log to read as follows?
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This commit also causes SRCU to use this new RCU-specific
> workqueue_struct. Note that SRCU's use of workqueues never blocks them
> waiting for readers, so this should be safe from a forward-progress
> viewpoint. Note that this moves SRCU from system_power_efficient_wq
> to a normal workqueue. In the unlikely event that this results in
> measurable degradation, a separate power-efficient workqueue will be
> creates for SRCU.

Sounds good. Please feel free to add

Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks.

--
tejun