[lkml]   [2009]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] create workqueue threads only when needed
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 03:24 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 08:37:41AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>> >
>> > > I don't know, most of those I've looked on are not documented about the reason
>> > > for a private workqueue. I guess most of them can use the usual kevent.

I rather suspect that the majority of private workqueues are there for
good reasons.

>> > The main problem with kevent is that it gets clogged up.
>> I don't think so. Here is a snapshot of the workqueue tracer in my
>> box currently:
> That's not quite what I meant ...
> The main problem with keventd I'd say is that it's used in all sort of
> exeptional code path (ie, driver reset path, error handling, etc...) for
> things that will msleep happily for tenth milliseconds, that sort of
> thing.
> IE. It will be pretty responsive -in general- but can suffer form
> horrible latencies every now and then.

Actually it /should/ be the other way around:

The shared workqueue should only be used for work that sleeps only
briefly (perhaps with the exception of very unlikely longer sleeps e.g.
for allocations that cause paging).

Work which /may/ sleep longer, for example performs SCSI transactions,
needs to go into a private workqueue or other kind of context.

OTOH you are right too; work which must not be deferred too long by work
from another uncooperative/ unfair subsystem is probably also better off
in an own workqueue...
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--= --=- ---=-

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-02-02 09:45    [W:0.099 / U:1.644 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site