On Mon, 2022-11-07 at 15:11 +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> Hi Jeff -
>
> > On Nov 7, 2022, at 10:01 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > nfsd has grown a dedicated workqueue for the filecache, but this job is
> > still queued to the system_wq. Change it to use the filecache_wq.
>
> Actually... there doesn't seem to be anything special about
> nfsd_filecache_wq. 9542e6a643fc ("nfsd: Containerise filecache
> laundrette") does not make clear why it was added.
>
> Playing devil's advocate: why not make the converse change and
> replace it with system_wq?
>
Good question.
At one time, allocating a workqueue gave you a dedicated pool of
threads, but that's no longer the case.
Documentation/core-api/workqueue.rst says: "A wq no longer manages
execution resources but serves as a domain for forward progress
guarantee, flush and work item attributes."
Given that we're allocating this workqueue exactly the same way we
allocate the system_wq, I don't think we need our own workqueue at all.
I'd be fine with changing this to be the reverse if you prefer.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/nfsd/filecache.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
> > index 1e76b0d3b83a..018fd1565193 100644
> > --- a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
> > +++ b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
> > @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ static void
> > nfsd_file_schedule_laundrette(void)
> > {
> > if (test_bit(NFSD_FILE_CACHE_UP, &nfsd_file_flags))
> > - queue_delayed_work(system_wq, &nfsd_filecache_laundrette,
> > + queue_delayed_work(nfsd_filecache_wq, &nfsd_filecache_laundrette,
> > NFSD_LAUNDRETTE_DELAY);
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.38.1
> >
>
> --
> Chuck Lever
>
>
>
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
