On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 05:14:29PM +0800, Wright Feng wrote: > > > Tejun Heo 於 3/25/2020 11:12 PM 寫道: > > Hello, > > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 11:06:33PM +0800, Wright Feng wrote: > > > I was trying do that, but the comment of alloc_oredered_workqueue shows that > > > only WQ_FREEZABLE and WQ_MEM_RECLAIM are meaningful, so... > > > > > > I will measure the throughput with "alloc_ordered_workqueue(NAME, > > > WQ_HIGHPRI, ...)" to see if WQ_HIGHPRI works with alloc_ordered_workqueue. > > > Thanks for the suggestion. > > > > > > --- > > > /** > > > * alloc_ordered_workqueue - allocate an ordered workqueue > > > * @fmt: printf format for the name of the workqueue > > > * @flags: WQ_* flags (only WQ_FREEZABLE and WQ_MEM_RECLAIM are meaningful) > > > * @args...: args for @fmt > > > > Yeah, I think the comment is outdated. If it doesn't work as expected, please > > let me know. > > > It works as expected. With alloc_oredered_workqueue(..., WQ_HIGHPRI, ...), > the nice value is -20 and throughput result with 43455(11ac) on 1 core 1.6 > Ghz platform is > Without WQ_HIGGPRI TX/RX: 293/301 (mbps) > With WQ_HIGHPRI TX/RX: 293/321 (mbps) Will update the comment. Thanks. -- tejun
