[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2 of 4] Introduce i386 fibril scheduling

* Zach Brown <> wrote:

> This patch introduces the notion of a 'fibril'. It's meant to be a
> lighter kernel thread. [...]

as per my other email, i dont really like this concept. This is the

> [...] There can be multiple of them in the process of executing for a
> given task_struct, but only one can every be actively running at a
> time. [...]

there's almost no scheduling cost from being able to arbitrarily
schedule a kernel thread - but there are /huge/ benefits in it.

would it be hard to redo your AIO patches based on a pool of plain
simple kernel threads?

We could even extend the scheduling properties of kernel threads so that
they could also be 'companion threads' of any given user-space task.
(i.e. they'd always schedule on the same CPu as that user-space task)

I bet most of the real benefit would come from co-scheduling them on the
same CPU. But this should be a performance property, not a basic design
property. (And i also think that having a limited per-CPU pool of AIO
threads works better than having a per-user-thread pool - but again this
is a detail that can be easily changed, not a fundamental design

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-02-01 09:41    [W:0.358 / U:0.244 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site