Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 24 Aug 2009 12:51:12 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/7] libata: use lazy workqueues for the pio task |
| |
On 08/24/2009 12:42 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Mon, Aug 24 2009, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> No objections to the code, operationally... >> >> But it is disappointing that the "1 thread on UP" problem is not solved >> while changing this libata area. Is there no way to specify a minimum >> lazy-thread count? >> >> A key problem continues to be tying to the number of CPUs, which is >> quite inappropriate for libata. > > We'll solve that next, the first problem is reducing the per-cpu > threads. Lots of places use per-cpu workqueues because that is what is > available, not necessarily because it's an appropriate choice. Like the > ata_wq above, it's not even a good fit.
Agreed + sounds great.
Thanks -- both for hacking libata for this, and more generally, for attacking the too-many-kthreads problem! :) It's just sad how many unused workqueue threads hang about, on every modern Linux box.
Jeff
| |