linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] libata: use single threaded work queue

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:	Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:47:27 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
CC:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, Mark Lord <liml@....ca>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: use single threaded work queue

Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 14:23 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> Well, that's the same thread pool suggestion that Jeff came up with.
>> And
>> I agree, that's a nicer long term solution (it's also how the per-bdi
>> flushing replacement works). The problem with that appears to be that
>> any suggested patchset for thread pools spiral into certain "but what
>> color should it be?!" death.
>>
>> I'll try and work up a simple create_threadpool() implementation, we
>> can
>> literally cut away hundreds of threads with that.
> 
> Don't we have one already ? Dave Howells slow_work or such ?

Yes, it addresses different aspect of the concurrency problem.  Might
be more suitable for ATA workqueues but definitely more costly to
convert to.  Argh...

-- 
tejun
--
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/