[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 2 of 4] Introduce i386 fibril scheduling
    > When parallelising "real work", I absolutely agree with you: we should use 
    > threads. But you need to look at what it is we parallelize here, and ask
    > yourself why we're doing what we're doing, and why people aren't *already*
    > just using a separate thread for it.

    Because its a pain in the arse and because its very hard to self tune. If
    you've got async_anything then the thread/fibril/synchronous/whatever
    decision can be made kernel side based upon expected cost and other
    tradeoffs, even if its as dumb as per syscall or per syscall/filp type

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-02-03 00:57    [W:0.020 / U:2.104 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site