lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Overview of concurrency managed workqueue
On 06/19/2010 10:38 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Andy Walls <awalls@md.metrocast.net> writes:
>>
>> I'm going to agree with Tejun, that tweaking worker thread priorities
>> seems like an odd thing, since they are meant to handle deferable
>> actions - things that can be put off until later.
>
>> If one needs to support Real Time deadlines on deferable actions,
>> wouldn't using dedicated kernel threads be more deterministic?
>> Would the user ever up the priority for a workqueue other than a
>> single-threaded workqueue?
>
> One exceptional case here are things like high priority error handling
> which is rare.
>
> For example you get an MCE that tells you some of your
> memory got corrupted and you should handle it ASAP.
> Better give it high priority then.
>
> But it's still a rare event so you don't want dedicated
> threads hanging around for it all time
> (that's what we currently have and it causes all sorts
> of problems)
>
> So yes I think having a priority mechanism for work items
> is useful.

Wouldn't that be better served by cpu_stop?

Thanks.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-06-19 10:43    [W:0.273 / U:0.172 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site