lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: workqueue thing
    Hello, Ingo.

    On 12/23/2009 05:12 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    >
    > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
    >
    >> At least as far as i'm concerned, i'd like to see actual uses. It's a big
    >> linecount increase all things considered:
    >>
    >> 20 files changed, 2783 insertions(+), 660 deletions(-)

    BTW, the code contains way more comment afterwards and has other
    benefits like not having crazy number of workers around on many core
    machines.

    >> and you say it _wont_ help performance/scalability (this aspect wasnt clear

    And I think it will help scalability for sure although it depends on
    what type of scalability you're talking about.

    >> to me from previous discussions), so the (yet to be seen) complexity
    >> reduction in other code ought to be worth it.
    >
    > To further stress this point, i'd like to point to the very first commit that
    > introduced kernel/workqueue.c into Linux 7 years ago:
    >
    > | From 6ed12ff83c765aeda7d38d3bf9df7d46d24bfb11 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
    > | From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
    > | Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 22:17:42 -0700
    > | Subject: [PATCH] [PATCH] Workqueue Abstraction
    >
    > look at the diffstat of that commit:
    >
    > 201 files changed, 1102 insertions(+), 1194 deletions(-)
    >
    > despite adding a new abstraction and kernel subsystem (workqueues), that
    > commit modified more than a hundred drivers to make use of it, and managed to
    > achieve a net linecount decrease of 92 lines - despite adding hundreds of
    > lines of a new core facility.
    >
    > Likewise, for this particular patchset it should be possible to identify
    > existing patterns of code in the existing code base of 6+ millions lines of
    > Linux driver code that would make the advantages of this +2000 lines of core
    > kernel code plain obvious. There were multipe claims of problems with the
    > current abstractions - so there sure must be a way to show off the new code in

    I'm not sure I'm gonna update that many places in a single sweep but
    yeah let's give it a shot.

    Thanks.

    --
    tejun


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-12-23 09:35    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans