Apologies, just cleaning out old mail and finding some I should have
responded to long ago:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 02:23:48AM +0530, Bhaktipriya Shridhar wrote:
> The workqueue "callback_wq" queues a single work item &cb->cb_work per
> nfsd4_callback instance and thus, it doesn't require execution ordering.
What's "execution ordering"?
We definitely do depend on the fact that at most one of these is running
at a time.
--b.
> Hence, alloc_workqueue has been used to replace the
> deprecated create_singlethread_workqueue instance.
>
> The WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag has not been set since this is an in-kernel nfs
> server and isn't involved in memory reclaim operations on the local
> host.
>
> Since there are fixed number of work items, explicit concurrency
> limit is unnecessary here.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bhaktipriya Shridhar <bhaktipriya96@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - No change. Made this a separate patch (categorised based on
> directories).
>
> fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
> index 7389cb1..a6611c6 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
> @@ -1021,7 +1021,7 @@ static const struct rpc_call_ops nfsd4_cb_ops = {
>
> int nfsd4_create_callback_queue(void)
> {
> - callback_wq = create_singlethread_workqueue("nfsd4_callbacks");
> + callback_wq = alloc_workqueue("nfsd4_callbacks", 0, 0);
> if (!callback_wq)
> return -ENOMEM;
> return 0;
> --
> 2.1.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
