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, 01 Oct 2009 13:57:31 +0100
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com, jeff@...zik.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	jens.axboe@...cle.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	cl@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/19] acpi: use queue_work_on() instead of binding workqueue worker to cpu0

Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:

> -	kacpid_wq = create_singlethread_workqueue("kacpid");
> -	bind_workqueue(kacpid_wq);
> -	kacpi_notify_wq = create_singlethread_workqueue("kacpi_notify");
> -	bind_workqueue(kacpi_notify_wq);
> -	kacpi_hotplug_wq = create_singlethread_workqueue("kacpi_hotplug");
> -	bind_workqueue(kacpi_hotplug_wq);
> +	kacpid_wq = create_workqueue("kacpid");
> +	kacpi_notify_wq = create_workqueue("kacpi_notify");
> +	kacpi_hotplug_wq = create_workqueue("kacpi_hotplug");

Doesn't that then create one worker thread per CPU and then eschew all but
those attached to CPU 0?  Sounds excessive, but presumably you deal with that
in later patches.

David
--
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