| 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: <26902.1266493816@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 11:50:16 +0000 From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu, 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, arjan@...ux.intel.com, avi@...hat.com, johannes@...solutions.net, andi@...stfloor.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 35/40] fscache: convert object to use workqueue instead of slow-work Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote: > The waiting workers are woken up in slow_work_enqueue() when a new > work is enqueued regardless of how many workers are currently in use, > right? So, it ends up yielding on any queue activity rather than only > under resource pressure. It depends how you define resource pressure, I suppose. There's someone now waiting for the resource, and there's someone blocking that resource who can yield it as they're waiting on something else. The question is if it's cheaper to create a new thread, assuming we're under the limit, or if it's cheaper to steal someone else's thread? David -- 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