Re: [PATCH v2] workqueue: Do not set CPU_INTENSIVE worker flags with wq_cpu_intensive_thresh_us=0

[Z qiang]

>
> Hello,
>
> I rewrote the patch description and separated it out into a separate if
> statement for readability. Applied to wq/for-6.5.
>
> Thanks.
>
> From 18c8ae813156a6855f026de80fffb91e1a28ab3d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 12:00:38 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] workqueue: Disable per-cpu CPU hog detection when
>  wq_cpu_intensive_thresh_us is 0
>
> If workqueue.cpu_intensive_thresh_us is set to 0, the detection mechanism
> for CPU-hogging per-cpu work item will keep triggering spuriously:
>
>   workqueue: process_srcu hogged CPU for >0us 4 times, consider switching to WQ_UNBOUND
>   workqueue: gc_worker hogged CPU for >0us 4 times, consider switching to WQ_UNBOUND
>   workqueue: gc_worker hogged CPU for >0us 8 times, consider switching to WQ_UNBOUND
>   workqueue: wait_rcu_exp_gp hogged CPU for >0us 4 times, consider switching to WQ_UNBOUND
>   workqueue: kfree_rcu_monitor hogged CPU for >0us 4 times, consider switching to WQ_UNBOUND
>   workqueue: kfree_rcu_monitor hogged CPU for >0us 8 times, consider switching to WQ_UNBOUND
>   workqueue: reg_todo hogged CPU for >0us 4 times, consider switching to WQ_UNBOUND
>
> This commit therefore disables the CPU-hog detection mechanism when
> workqueue.cpu_intensive_thresh_us is set to 0.
>
> tj: Patch description updated and the condition check on
>     cpu_intensive_thresh_us separated into a separate if statement for
>     readability.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Can you please use your full name as in "FIRST_NAME LAST_NAME <EMAIL>" when
> signing-off patches in the future?
>

Because there are many people with the same name as me, so I use the
abbreviation of the name to distinguish,
but in the future I will use the full name  :) .

Thanks
Zqiang

>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> tejun