[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9997.1254401851@redhat.com>
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