Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: workqueue thing | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:43:32 +0100 |
| |
On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 09:17 +0100, Stijn Devriendt wrote: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote: > > One reason I liked a more dynamic frame work for this is that it > > has the potential to be exposed to user space and allow automatic > > work partitioning there based on available cores. User space > > has a lot more CPU consumption than the kernel. > > > Basically, this is exactly what I was trying to solve with my > sched_wait_block patch. It was broken in all ways, but the ultimate > goal was to have concurrency managed workqueues (to nick the term) > in userspace and have a way out when I/O hits the workqueue.
Don't we have the problem of wakeup concurrency here?
Forking on blocking is only half the problem (and imho the easy half).
| |