[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: workqueue thing
On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 01:13 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On 12/23/2009 01:02 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > One key thing i havent seen in this discussion are actual measurements. I
> > think a lot could be decided by simply testing this patch-set, by looking at
> > the hard numbers: how much faster (or slower) did a particular key workload
> > get before/after these patches.
> We are dealing with situations where drivers are using workqueues to
> provide a sleep-able context, and trying to solve problems related to that.

So why are threaded interrupts not considered? Isn't the typical atomic
context of drivers the IRQ handler?

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-23 09:45    [W:0.106 / U:10.804 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site