lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:23:38 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
Cc:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@....com.au>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
	Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: threadlets as 'naive pool of threads', epoll, some measurements


* Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru> wrote:

> > no. Please read the evserver_threadlet.c code. There's no kevent in 
> > there. There's no epoll() in there. All that you can see there is 
> > the natural behavior of pure threadlets. And it's not a workload /I/ 
> > picked for threadlets - it is a workload, filesize, parallelism 
> > level and request handling function /you/ picked for 
> > "event-servers".
> 
> I know that there is no kevents there, that would be really strange if 
> you would test it in your environment after all that empty kevent 
> releases.

i havent got around figuring out the last v2.6.20 based kevent release, 
and your git tree is v2.6.21-rc1 based. Do you have some easy URL for me 
to fetch the last v2.6.20 kevent release?

> Enough, you say micro-thread design is superior - ok, that is your 
> point.

note that threadlets are not 'micro-threads'. A threadlet is more of an 
'optional thread' (as i mentioned it earlier): whenever it does anything 
that makes it distinct from a plain function call, it's converted into a 
separate thread by the kernel. Otherwise it behaves like a plain 
function call and returns.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ