[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1254646179.26976.10.camel@twins>
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 10:49:39 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, jeff@...zik.org, mingo@...e.hu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/19] workqueue: implement concurrency managed
workqueue
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 07:49 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> This approach would appear to rule out the option of setting a work
> thread's state (scheduling policy, scheduling priority, uid, etc) to
> anything other than some default.
>
> I guess that's unlikely to be a problem if we haven't yet had a need to
> do that, but I'd be a bit surprised to discover that nobody has done
> that sort of thing yet? Nobody has niced up their workqueue threads?
-rt actually used to do PI on worklets, and that sure flipped the
scheduling class around a lot.
--
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