On 2/22/21 3:11 AM, Alexey Gladkov wrote:

On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 04:38:10PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:

quoted

On 2/15/21 5:41 AM, Alexey Gladkov wrote:

quoted

diff --git a/fs/io-wq.c b/fs/io-wq.c
index a564f36e260c..5b6940c90c61 100644
--- a/fs/io-wq.c
+++ b/fs/io-wq.c

@@ -1090,10 +1091,7 @@ struct io_wq *io_wq_create(unsigned bounded, struct io_wq_data *data)
 		wqe->node = alloc_node;
 		wqe->acct[IO_WQ_ACCT_BOUND].max_workers = bounded;
 		atomic_set(&wqe->acct[IO_WQ_ACCT_BOUND].nr_running, 0);
-		if (wq->user) {
-			wqe->acct[IO_WQ_ACCT_UNBOUND].max_workers =
-					task_rlimit(current, RLIMIT_NPROC);
-		}
+		wqe->acct[IO_WQ_ACCT_UNBOUND].max_workers = task_rlimit(current, RLIMIT_NPROC);

This doesn't look like an equivalent transformation. But that may be
moot if we merge the io_uring-worker.v3 series, as then you would not
have to touch io-wq at all.

In the current code the wq->user is always set to current_user():

io_uring_create [1]
`- io_sq_offload_create
   `- io_init_wq_offload [2]
      `-io_wq_create [3]

current vs other wasn't my concern, but we're always setting ->user so
the test was pointless. So looks fine to me.

-- 
Jens Axboe