Hello, On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 11:46:45AM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2024-01-29 23:11:54 [-1000], Tejun Heo wrote: > > if (in_hardirq() || irqs_disabled()) { > > - io->in_tasklet = true; > > - tasklet_init(&io->tasklet, kcryptd_crypt_tasklet, (unsigned long)&io->work); > > - tasklet_schedule(&io->tasklet); > > + INIT_WORK(&io->work, kcryptd_crypt); > > + queue_work(system_bh_wq, &io->work); > > Why do we need the tasklet here in the first place? Couldn't we use > workqueue? As per comment, the request originates in hardirq and then it > is moved to tasklet. Couldn't it be moved to workqueue regardless? Yes, you can and if you replace that system_bh_wq with system_wq, or system_highpri_wq, everything should be fine in terms of correctness. However, that would mean that the work item now would always incur a scheduling latency which can be lengthy in certain circumstances. Whether that's an actual problem for the subsystem at hand, I have no idea. Thanks. -- tejun