lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Overview of concurrency managed workqueue
Hello,

On 06/19/2010 11:08 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> I think it's reasonable to just put on front. The individual
> items shouldn't take that long, right?
>
> (in fact I have an older patch for work queues which implemented
> that)

Well, in general, queueing to execution latency should be fairly low
especially if it's put at the front of the queue but well it's nothing
with any kind of guarantee.

>> If there are multiple of such use cases, it would make sense to create
>> a prioritized worker pools along with prioritized per-cpu queues but
>> if there are only a few of them, I think it makes more sense to use
>> dedicated threads for them. Do those threads need to be per-cpu?
>
> Not strictly, although it might be useful on a error flood when
> a whole DIMM goes bad.

I'm currently writing a kthread wrapper which basically provides
similar interface to wq but guarantees binding to a specific thread
which can be RT of course. If single threadedness is acceptable, I
think this would render better behavior. What do you think?

Thanks.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-06-19 11:17    [W:0.140 / U:0.376 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site