linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/19] workqueue: reimplement workqueue flushing using color coded works

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1260182549.8223.1463.camel@laptop>
Date:	Mon, 07 Dec 2009 11:42:29 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, awalls@...ix.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeff@...zik.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com, avi@...hat.com,
	johannes@...solutions.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/19] workqueue: reimplement workqueue flushing using
 color coded works

On Mon, 2009-12-07 at 19:40 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On 12/07/2009 05:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > A sudden influx of high prio worklets would hold back the completion of
> > existing worklets, so simply waiting for a particular colour to deplete
> > is going to last a long while.
> > 
> > The barrier semantics I implemented ensured worklets couldn't cross a
> > barrier, so if a high prio item got stuck behind a barrier it would
> > simply elevate the priority of everything before the barrier, and would
> > complete everything before that barrier before running itself.
> > 
> > This insures progress and thereby guarantees completion of flushes.
> 
> Hmmm... I haven't really thought about priority aware implementation
> but if we're gonna do that with global shared workers, the logical way
> to do it would be to have separate workers with higher priority so
> that the prioritizing and starvation prevention can be handled by the
> schduler as it does for all other tasks.  What kind of priorities are
> we talking about?  How granual?

Currently the normal 140 priority ones.

--
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/