On Sun, 2016-03-20 at 14:55 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> If everything else is working, I'd be happy to throw in
> WQ_MEM_RECLAIM but I really don't want to add it if it doesn't
> actually achieve the goal. Can a wireless person chime in here?
>
I think for many wireless devices the workqueue, like
Hello,
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 05:24:05PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > But does that actually work? It's pointless to add WQ_MEM_RECLAIM to
> > workqueues unless all other things are also guaranteed to make forward
> > progress regardless of memory pressure.
>
> It's supposed to work.
>
>
Hello,
Years ago, workqueue got reimplemented to use common worker pools
across different workqueues and a new set of more expressive workqueue
creation APIs, alloc_*workqueue() were introduced. The old
create_*workqueue() became simple wrappers around alloc_*workqueue()
with the most conservativ
Hello, Jeff.
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 09:32:16PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > * Are network devices expected to be able to serve as a part of
> > storage stack which is depended upon for memory reclamation?
>
> I think they should be. Cached NFS pages can consume a lot of memory,
> and flushing
On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 09:45:46 -0700
Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Years ago, workqueue got reimplemented to use common worker pools
> across different workqueues and a new set of more expressive workqueue
> creation APIs, alloc_*workqueue() were introduced. The old
> create_*workqueue() became s
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 04:46:23PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Jeff.
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 09:32:16PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > * Are network devices expected to be able to serve as a part of
> > > storage stack which is depended upon for memory reclamation?
> >
> > I think the
