workqueue: mark init_workqueues() as early_initcall()
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: [tip:x86/cpu] x86, cpu: Package Level Thermal Control, Power Limit Notification definitions
Next: [PATCH] net: Add getsockopt support for TCP thin-streams
From: Andrew Morton on 30 Jul 2010 20:00 On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:57:37 -0700 Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha(a)intel.com> wrote: > Mark init_workqueues() as early_initcall() and thus it will be initialized > before smp bringup. init_workqueues() registers for the hotcpu notifier > and thus it should cope with the processors that are brought online after > the workqueues are initialized. > > x86 smp bringup code uses workqueues and uses a workaround for the > cold boot process (as the workqueues are initialized post smp_init()). > Marking init_workqueues() as early_initcall() will pave the way for > cleaning up this code. > I sure hope this has been tested against linux-next. kernel/workqueue.c has been vastly changed and -tip doesn't know about that. linux-next should include -tip and is hence a better tree to develop and test against. AFAICT the main thing which needs checking is that the new init_workqueues() doesn't do anything which requires that sched_init_smp() has been executed. The patch otherwise looks OK and killing that hack in the x86 code was most merciful. for_each_gcwq_cpu(), for_each_online_gcwq_cpu() and for_each_cwq_cpu() make me cry. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Suresh Siddha on 30 Jul 2010 20:50
On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 16:55 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:57:37 -0700 > Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha(a)intel.com> wrote: > > > Mark init_workqueues() as early_initcall() and thus it will be initialized > > before smp bringup. init_workqueues() registers for the hotcpu notifier > > and thus it should cope with the processors that are brought online after > > the workqueues are initialized. > > > > x86 smp bringup code uses workqueues and uses a workaround for the > > cold boot process (as the workqueues are initialized post smp_init()). > > Marking init_workqueues() as early_initcall() will pave the way for > > cleaning up this code. > > > > I sure hope this has been tested against linux-next. > kernel/workqueue.c has been vastly changed and -tip doesn't know about > that. linux-next should include -tip and is hence a better tree to > develop and test against. > > AFAICT the main thing which needs checking is that the new > init_workqueues() doesn't do anything which requires that > sched_init_smp() has been executed. > > The patch otherwise looks OK and killing that hack in the x86 code was > most merciful. > > for_each_gcwq_cpu(), for_each_online_gcwq_cpu() and for_each_cwq_cpu() > make me cry. hmm.. too many changes in linux-next. Yes, as far as these patches are concerned, they work against linux-next aswell. Just posted -v2 which is on top of linux-next. ia64 also had the same issue, addressed in -v2 aswell. thanks, suresh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |