lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 34/35] async: use workqueue for worker pool
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 05:46:32PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 06/29/2010 02:18 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> Yeah, well, that's kind of the whole point of cmwq. It would try to
> >> minimize the number of used workers but the provided concurrency will
> >> still be enough. No async probe will be stalled due to lack of
> >> execution context and the timings should be about the same between the
> >> original async implemetnation and cmwq based one.
> >
> > Right. I just don't know what is supposed to be slow on boot that
> > needs to use async. Is that because reading some ports is slow or
> > because we need to do something and wait for some times to get the
> > result.
>
> It's things like ATA bus resetting and probing. They're usually
> composed of short CPU activities and rather long sleeps.


Ok.



> > If there is a question of slow ports to probe, then cmwq wouldn't seem the
> > right thing here, as it only forks when we go to sleep.
>
> I lost you here. If something during boot has to burn cpu cycles
> (which it shouldn't, really), it has to burn cpu cycles and having
> multiple concurent threads won't help anything.



It would on SMP.



> If something doesn't
> burn cpu cycles but takes long, it gotta sleep and cmwq will start a
> new thread immediately. So, can you please elaborate why cmwq would
> be problematic?


No in this case it's not problematic, as far as the things that were using
async have a small cpu burn and long sleep waiting, it looks like cmwq
fits :)



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-06-29 17:55    [W:0.108 / U:0.832 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site