[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4547B01A.2060700@drzeus.cx>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 21:20:42 +0100
From: Pierre Ossman <drzeus-list@...eus.cx>
To: "Jörn Engel" <joern@...nheim.fh-wedel.de>
CC: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...do.de>,
Harald Welte <laforge@...filter.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
Subject: Re: feature-removal-schedule obsoletes
Jörn Engel wrote:
> Why does the MMC block driver use a thread? Is there a technical
> reason for this or could it be done in original process context as
> well, removing some code and useless cpu scheduler overhead?
>
I'm afraid I don't know the block layer very well, but that thread seems
to be polling the block layer for requests and handing the over to the
routines in mmc_block.c.
How do you set it up so that the block layer itself calls the necessary
function?
Rgds
--
-- Pierre Ossman
Linux kernel, MMC maintainer http://www.kernel.org
PulseAudio, core developer http://pulseaudio.org
rdesktop, core developer http://www.rdesktop.org
-
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