Re: [PATCH] platform/surface: acpi-notify: add WQ_PERCPU to alloc_workqueue users

[Marco Crivellari]

On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 3:43 PM Ilpo Järvinen
<ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> [...]
> > What do you think, is it better in this way?
>
> Still quite non-specific to this particular change.
>
> > "
> > This continues the effort to refactor workqueue APIs, which began with
> > the introduction of new workqueues and a new alloc_workqueue flag in:
> >
> > commit 128ea9f6ccfb ("workqueue: Add system_percpu_wq and system_dfl_wq")
> > commit 930c2ea566af ("workqueue: Add new WQ_PERCPU flag")
> >
>
> The refactoring is going to alter the default behavior of ...
> [*].
>
> > For more details see the Link tag below.
>
>
>
> > This change adds a new WQ_PERCPU flag to explicitly request
>
> This change doesn't add a new flag, "explicitly request" part is correct
> though but as written things are mixed up.
>
> I'd just replace this paragraph and the next with something much simpler
> and more to the point:
>
> "In order to keep alloc_workqueue() behavior identical, explicitly request
> WQ_PERCPU."
>
> > alloc_workqueue() to be per-cpu when WQ_UNBOUND has not been specified.
> >
> > With the introduction of the WQ_PERCPU flag (equivalent to !WQ_UNBOUND),
> > any alloc_workqueue() caller that doesn’t explicitly specify WQ_UNBOUND
> > must now use WQ_PERCPU.
>
> This belongs earlier to description of the refactoring (to [*]).
>
> > Once migration is complete, WQ_UNBOUND can be removed and unbound will
> > become the implicit default.
>
> This is irrelevant detail about refactoring since WQ_PERCPU is used here.

Thanks for the suggestions, I think it should be ok now:

This continues the effort to refactor workqueue APIs, which began with
the introduction of new workqueues and a new alloc_workqueue flag in:

commit 128ea9f6ccfb ("workqueue: Add system_percpu_wq and system_dfl_wq")
commit 930c2ea566af ("workqueue: Add new WQ_PERCPU flag")

The refactoring is going to alter the default behavior of
alloc_workqueue() to be per-cpu when WQ_UNBOUND has not been specified.

With the introduction of the WQ_PERCPU flag (equivalent to !WQ_UNBOUND),
any alloc_workqueue() caller that doesn’t explicitly specify WQ_UNBOUND
must now use WQ_PERCPU.
For more details see the Link tag below.

In order to keep alloc_workqueue() behavior identical, explicitly request
WQ_PERCPU.


If it sounds good I will send the v2.

Thanks!


-- 

Marco Crivellari

L3 Support Engineer, Technology & Product