[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091221113301.GG25372@basil.fritz.box>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 12:33:01 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
awalls@...ix.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeff@...zik.org,
mingo@...e.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
cl@...ux-foundation.org, dhowells@...hat.com, avi@...hat.com,
johannes@...solutions.net
Subject: Re: workqueue thing
>> Also the nice thing about dynamically sizing the thread pool
>> is that if something bad (error condition that takes long) happens
>> in one work queue for a specific subsystem there's still a chance
>> to make process with other operations in the same subsystem.
>
> yup
> same is true for hitting some form of contention; just make an extra thread
> so that the rest can continue.
If you dynamically increase you can/should as well dynamically shrink too.
And with some more gimmicks you're nearly at what Tejun is proposing
Not sure what you're arguing against?
-Andi
>
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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