[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0707172050180.9131@pentafluge.infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:52:14 +0100 (BST)
From: James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Paul Fulghum <paulkf@...rogate.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux console project <linuxconsole-dev@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use tty_schedule in VT code.
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Paul Fulghum wrote:
> >
> > The scheduling is to move the processing out of interrupt context.
> > The receive data is often extracted from the hardware
> > at interrupt time and then queued for processing.
>
> You misunderstand.
>
> If the "delay" is zero, then why are you using "delayed" workqueues at
> all?
>
> A delay of zero tends to be pointless. It's not a delay at all, and you
> could just use the regular NON-DELAYING workqueues.
Because sometimes you do want the delay. In other parts of the tty
code we do delay. What should be done is
if (tty->low_latency)
flush_to_ldisc(&tty->buf.work.work);
else
schedule_delayed_work(&tty->buf.work, 1);
Is this acceptable to you?
-
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