On 23 January 2014 19:31, Frederic Weisbecker fweisbec@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, so it is fine to migrate the latter kind I guess?
Unless somebody has abused the API and used bound workqueues where he should have used unbound ones.
I haven't checked the details but then this quiesce option would involve a dependency on cpuset for any workload involving workqueues affinity. I'm not sure we really want this. Besides, workqueues have an existing sysfs interface that can be easily extended.
Now indeed we may also want to enforce some policy to make sure that further created and queued workqueues are affine to a specific subset of CPUs. And then cpuset sounds like a good idea :)
Exactly. Cpuset would be more useful here. Probably we can keep both cpusets and sysfs interface of workqueues..
I will try to add this option under cpuset which will initially move timers and workqueues away from the cpuset in question.