[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070626150323.anz74r8q8s408s4o@webmail.df.eu>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:03:23 +0200
From: Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, matthew.wilcox@...com,
kuznet@....inr.ac.ru
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Convert all tasklets to workqueues
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> so how about the following, different approach: anyone who has a tasklet
> in any performance-sensitive codepath, please yell now.
ALSA uses quite a few tasklets in the framework and in several
drivers. Since we
care very much about low latency, many places use tasklet_hi_*.
It would be possible to convert to some GENERIC_SOFTIRQ mechanism, but
then we'd
want to use a softirq that has higher priority than the 'standard' generic
softirq, similar to HI_SOFTIRQ vs. TASKLET_SOFTIRQ.
BTW: Is there a reason why HRTIMER_SOFTIRQ is the lowest-priority
softirq instead
of being near TIMER_SOFTIRQ?
Regards,
Clemens
-
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