Re: [Openipmi-developer] [PATCH 7/9] s390: Convert from tasklet to BH workqueue

[Heiko C. <hc...@li...>]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 04:03:12PM +0000, Allen Pais wrote:
> The only generic interface to execute asynchronously in the BH context is
> tasklet; however, it's marked deprecated and has some design flaws. To
> replace tasklets, BH workqueue support was recently added. A BH workqueue
> behaves similarly to regular workqueues except that the queued work items
> are executed in the BH context.
> 
> This patch converts drivers/infiniband/* from tasklet to BH workqueue.
> 
> Based on the work done by Tejun Heo <tj...@ke...>
> Branch: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git for-6.10

I guess this dependency is a hard requirement due to commit 134874e2eee9
("workqueue: Allow cancel_work_sync() and disable_work() from atomic contexts
on BH work items")?

> ---
>  drivers/s390/block/dasd.c              | 42 ++++++++++++------------
>  drivers/s390/block/dasd_int.h          | 10 +++---
>  drivers/s390/char/con3270.c            | 27 ++++++++--------
>  drivers/s390/crypto/ap_bus.c           | 24 +++++++-------
>  drivers/s390/crypto/ap_bus.h           |  2 +-
>  drivers/s390/crypto/zcrypt_msgtype50.c |  2 +-
>  drivers/s390/crypto/zcrypt_msgtype6.c  |  4 +--
>  drivers/s390/net/ctcm_fsms.c           |  4 +--
>  drivers/s390/net/ctcm_main.c           | 15 ++++-----
>  drivers/s390/net/ctcm_main.h           |  5 +--
>  drivers/s390/net/ctcm_mpc.c            | 12 +++----
>  drivers/s390/net/ctcm_mpc.h            |  7 ++--
>  drivers/s390/net/lcs.c                 | 26 +++++++--------
>  drivers/s390/net/lcs.h                 |  2 +-
>  drivers/s390/net/qeth_core_main.c      |  2 +-
>  drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_qdio.c          | 45 +++++++++++++-------------
>  drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_qdio.h          |  9 +++---
>  17 files changed, 117 insertions(+), 121 deletions(-)

I'm asking since this patch comes with multiple compile errors. Probably due
to lack of cross compiler tool chain on your side.

If the above wouldn't be a hard dependency I'd say we could take those parts
of your patch which are fine into the s390 tree for 6.10, fix the rest, and
schedule that as well for 6.10 via the s390 tree.