From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kfence: use TASK_IDLE when awaiting allocation
Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 13:17:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANpmjNMD58SJPeVnKrx1=mXoudPZFs+HoCsVujYomCtZ5K+DKQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210521093715.1813-1-hdanton@sina.com>
On Fri, 21 May 2021 at 11:37, Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 2021 10:32:09 +0200 Marco Elver wrote:
> >Since wait_event() uses TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE by default, waiting for an
> >allocation counts towards load. However, for KFENCE, this does not make
> >any sense, since there is no busy work we're awaiting.
>
> Because of a blocking wq callback, kfence_timer should be queued on a
> unbound workqueue in the first place. Feel free to add a followup to
> replace system_power_efficient_wq with system_unbound_wq if it makes
> sense to you that kfence behaves as correctly as expected independent of
> CONFIG_WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT_DEFAULT given "system_power_efficient_wq is
> identical to system_wq if 'wq_power_efficient' is disabled."
Thanks for pointing it out -- I think this makes sense, let's just use
the unbound wq unconditionally. Since it's independent of this patch,
I've sent it separately:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210521111630.472579-1-elver@google.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-21 11:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-21 8:32 [PATCH] kfence: use TASK_IDLE when awaiting allocation Marco Elver
2021-05-21 9:37 ` Hillf Danton
2021-05-21 11:17 ` Marco Elver [this message]
2021-05-21 9:39 ` David Laight
2021-05-21 9:47 ` Marco Elver
2021-05-21 10:15 ` David Laight
2021-06-07 14:23 ` [5.12.y] " Marco Elver
2021-06-08 13:21 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CANpmjNMD58SJPeVnKrx1=mXoudPZFs+HoCsVujYomCtZ5K+DKQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=elver@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.