[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20060907230130.GA9289@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 16:01:30 -0700
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: Naughty ramdrives
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 03:20:37PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 02:08:53 +0400
> Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > > So I assume udev is still madly crunching on its message backlog while
> > > this is happening?
> > >
> > > If so, ug.
> >
> > OK. I'll let it stabilize, sorry.
>
> You shouldn't have to.
You shouldn't have to what? You purposefully add and remove a block
driver as fast as is possible, creating a ton of new events and you
expect userspace processing of those events to be able to keep up in
real-time with it?
On the later versions of udev we are _way_ faster, we only listen to the
netlink socket, no extra programs are spawned, but still, we can only
work so fast :)
My machine had no interactive response issues while this was happening,
even with both processors being run at 100% cpu usage until I stoped the
loop and then udev recovered a few seconds later. This is even with
HALD recieving all of these events from udev, remember it's not just
udev in the event processing chain.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
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