| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <c76f371a0912230031r5f0fd892hc814ae7a0305792f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:31:08 +0100 From: Stijn Devriendt <highguy@...il.com> To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, 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, a@...per.es Subject: Re: workqueue thing On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 12:50 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote: >> 2) doesn't deal with cpu heavy tasks/wakeup parallelism > > workqueue was never suited for this. MT workqueues have strong CPU > affinity which doesn't make sense for CPU-heavy workloads. It does, really. Have a look at TBB and others. You always want to keep workqueue items as close to the scheduling thread as possible as the chance of having a hot cache and TLBs and such are far greater. The end result is CPU-affine threads fetching work from CPU-affine queues with workitems scheduled by a thread on that CPU. To improve parallellism, workqueue threads with empty workqueues start stealing work away from non-empty workqueues. The added warmup doesn't weigh in against the added parallellism in those cases. Stijn -- 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