Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:46:30 +0200 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH UPDATED 1/3] vhost: replace vhost_workqueue with per-vhost kthread |
| |
On 07/26/2010 05:34 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On 07/26/2010 05:25 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> BTW, kthread_worker would benefit from the optimization I implemented >> here as well. > > Hmmm... I'm not quite sure whether it's an optimization. I thought > the patch was due to feeling uncomfortable about using barriers? Is > it an optimization?
Yeah, one less smp_mb() in execution path. The lock dancing in flush() is ugly but then again mucking with barriers could be harder to understand. Care to send a patch against wq#for-next tree?
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |