|| ||David Howells <dhowells-AT-redhat.com> |
|| ||Tejun Heo <tj-AT-kernel.org> |
|| ||Re: [RFC PATCHSET] workqueue: implement concurrency managed workqueue |
|| ||Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:53:49 +0100|
|| ||jeff-AT-garzik.org, mingo-AT-elte.hu, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org,
|| ||Article, Thread
Sounds interesting as a replacement for slow-work. Some thoughts for you:
The most important features of slow-work are:
(1) Work items are not re-entered whilst they are executing.
(2) The slow-work facility keeps references on its work items by asking the
client to get and put on the client's refcount.
(3) The slow-work facility can create a lot more threads than the number of
CPUs on a system, and the system doesn't grind to a halt if they're all
taken up with long term I/O (performing several mkdirs for example).
I think you have (1) and (3) covered, but I'm unsure about (2).
Also, does it actually make sense to bind threads that are performing
long-term I/O to particular CPUs? Threads that are going to spend a lot more
time sleeping on disk I/O than actually running on a CPU?
to post comments)