> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 01:45:19PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 10:30:08PM +0200, Andrey Albershteyn wrote: > > > From: Andrey Albershteyn <aalbersh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > For XFS, fsverity's global workqueue is not really suitable due to: > > > > > > 1. High priority workqueues are used within XFS to ensure that data > > > IO completion cannot stall processing of journal IO completions. > > > Hence using a WQ_HIGHPRI workqueue directly in the user data IO > > > path is a potential filesystem livelock/deadlock vector. > > > > Do they? I though the whole point of WQ_HIGHPRI was that they'd > > have separate rescue workers to avoid any global pool effects. > > HIGHPRI and MEM_RECLAIM are orthogonal. HIGHPRI makes the workqueue use > worker pools with high priority, so all work items would execute at MIN_NICE > (-20). Hmm... actually, rescuer doesn't set priority according to the > workqueue's, which seems buggy. Andrey (or others involved with previous versions): is interference with the log completion workqueue what you ran into? Tejun, are you going to prepare a patch to fix the rescuer priority?
