[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091223080144.GG23839@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:01:44 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, awalls@...ix.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeff@...zik.org,
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, andi@...stfloor.org
Subject: Re: workqueue thing
* Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> > We really are not forced to the space of Gedankenexperiments here.
>
> Sure but there's a reason why I posted the patchset without the actual
> conversions. I wanted to make sure that it's not rejected on the ground of
> its basic design. I thought it was acceptable after the first RFC round but
> while trying to merge the scheduler part, Peter seemed mightily unhappy with
> the whole thing, so this second RFC round. So, if anyone has major issues
> with the basic design, please step forward *now* before I go spending more
> time working on it.
At least as far as i'm concerned, i'd like to see actual uses. It's a big
linecount increase all things considered:
20 files changed, 2783 insertions(+), 660 deletions(-)
and you say it _wont_ help performance/scalability (this aspect wasnt clear to
me from previous discussions), so the (yet to be seen) complexity reduction in
other code ought to be worth it.
Ingo
--
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