On Thu, 2026-01-08 at 18:51 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:

This is an automated AI-generated review of your patch.

For local reproduction steps see https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!Jb4IwiQLlwSJFlqvRCi7Y54pEISEQKXyPiBtYXeM74mbOhBIwKUuPgo6RDWff-8JqJFtVL9t7X_PJiy6vw$ 

Hi Jakub,

Yes, I saw the AI response on patchwork yesterday and am working on an update already.  Thanks for the reproducer link,
I'll see if I can work out any more AI gripes.

Thank you!
Allison

---
commit 0d0b74852d11c82ac7d91c72b33c5dccb75934c5
Author: Allison Henderson [off-list ref]

    net/rds: Add per cp work queue

This patch adds cp_wq to struct rds_conn_path and substitutes rds_wq with
cp->cp_wq throughout the RDS codebase to enable per-connection workqueue
management.

quoted

diff --git a/net/rds/ib_send.c b/net/rds/ib_send.c
index 4190b90ff3b1..e35bbb6ffb68 100644
--- a/net/rds/ib_send.c
+++ b/net/rds/ib_send.c

@@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ void rds_ib_send_add_credits(struct rds_connection *conn, unsigned int credits)

 	atomic_add(IB_SET_SEND_CREDITS(credits), &ic->i_credits);
 	if (test_and_clear_bit(RDS_LL_SEND_FULL, &conn->c_flags))
-		queue_delayed_work(rds_wq, &conn->c_send_w, 0);
+		queue_delayed_work(conn->c_path->cp_wq, &conn->c_send_w, 0);

 	WARN_ON(IB_GET_SEND_CREDITS(credits) >= 16384);

This substitution in rds_ib_send_add_credits() looks correct, but was the
similar call site in rds_ib_send_cqe_handler() in the same file
intentionally left unchanged? That function still uses:

    queue_delayed_work(rds_wq, &conn->c_send_w, 0);

Both functions have access to conn->c_path->cp_wq, so the inconsistency
seems unintentional. If some call sites should remain on the global rds_wq
while others use the per-connection workqueue, it would help to understand
the reasoning.

Similarly, rds_cong_queue_updates() in net/rds/cong.c still uses:

    queue_delayed_work(rds_wq, &cp->cp_send_w, 0);

even though it already has cp available. Should this also be updated to
use cp->cp_wq for consistency with the other substitutions?