Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:46:05 +0000 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: Linux/Pro [was Re: Coding style - a non-issue] |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote: > > 128 kernel threads sitting around waiting for a problem that > > rarely happens seems a little.. strange. (for want of a better word). > > I've kinda lost the plot on ksoftirqd. Never really understood > why a thread was needed for this, nor why it runs at nice +20. > But things seem to be working now.
Me no idea either. It wasn't to work around the problem of losing softirqs on syscall return was it? Because there was a patch for that in the low-latency set that fixed that without a thread, and without a delay...
-- Jamie - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |