lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: workqueue thing
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 12:37:32PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> I wrote this before but if something is burning CPU cycles using MT
> workqueues, this can be easily supported by marking such workqueue as
> not concurrency-managed. ie. Works queued for such workqueues
> wouldn't contribute to the perceived workqueue concurrency and will be
> left to be managed solely by the scheduler. This will completely
> cover the crypto_wq case which uses MT workqueue with local cpu
> binding.

Right, the main use of workqueues in the crypto subsystem currently
is to perform operations in a process context, e.g., in order to
use SSE instructions on x86, so there is no real parallelism
involved.

However, Steffen Klassert has proposed a parallelisation mechanism
whereby extremely CPU-intensive operations such as encryption may
be split across CPUs. Steffen, could you repost your padata patches
here?

Thanks,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-23 07:57    [W:0.128 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site