On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 03:23:27PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (09/22/16 15:42), Minchan Kim wrote:
> [..]
> > +static int __zram_cpu_notifier(void *dummy, unsigned long action,
> > + unsigned long cpu)
> > {
> > struct zram_worker *worker;
> >
> > - while (!list_empty(&workers.worker_list)) {
> > + switch (action) {
> > + case CPU_UP_PREPARE:
> > + worker = kmalloc(sizeof(*worker), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!worker) {
> > + pr_err("Can't allocate a worker\n");
> > + return NOTIFY_BAD;
> > + }
> > +
> > + worker->task = kthread_run(zram_thread, NULL, "zramd-%lu", cpu);
> > + if (IS_ERR(worker->task)) {
> > + kfree(worker);
> > + pr_err("Can't allocate a zram thread\n");
> > + return NOTIFY_BAD;
> > + }
>
> well, strictly speaking we are have no strict bound-to-cpu (per-cpu)
> requirement here, we just want to have num_online_cpus() worker threads.
> if we fail to create one more worker thread nothing really bad happens,
> so I think we better not block that cpu from coming online.
> iow, always 'return NOTIFY_OK'.
If it doesn't make code complicated, I will do that in next spin.
Thanks.
