Hi Florian, Paolo
On 22/06/2020 16:51, Paolo Abeni wrote:
On Mon, 2020-06-22 at 15:03 +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Paolo Abeni <pabeni(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2020-06-22 at 13:18 +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
>>> Paolo Abeni <pabeni(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> I'm wondering if we should keep using an MPTCP-specific workqueue.
>>>> Server side, we don't expect the work to trigger very often, but
>>>> that ever happen, top will tell easily.
>>> You mean switch msk->work from system_wq to a custom workqueue?
>> yep, e.g. reusing and renaming 'pm_wq'. When the PM works a lot (in
>> "ndiffports" mode as in issues/33), the pm_wq is visible in top - at
>> least in dbg build, I never tested with regular kconfig - and I like
>> being able to identify it easily. WDYT?
> Can you do this?
I'll try to run the perf tests on non-debug build, but I see your
point. Let's keep the patch simple - as is now. We can look for a
workqueue only if mptcp workqueue usage proves to be relevant in non
Thank you for the patch and the review!
I just added this patch at the end of the series.
- bcb252d3443b: mptcp: use mptcp worker for path management
Tests and export are in progress.
Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions