[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1006151339510.9635@router.home>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 13:40:39 -0500 (CDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
cc: mingo@...e.hu, awalls@...ix.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jeff@...zik.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
dhowells@...hat.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
johannes@...solutions.net, oleg@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk
Subject: Re: Overview of concurrency managed workqueue
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, Tejun Heo wrote:
> == Benefits
>
> * Less to worry about causing deadlocks around execution resources.
>
> * Far fewer number of kthreads.
>
> * More flexibility without runtime overhead.
>
> * As concurrency is no longer a problem, workloads which needed
> separate mechanisms can now use generic workqueue instead. This
> easy access to concurrency also allows stuff which wasn't worth
> implementing a dedicated mechanism for but still needed flexible
> concurrency.
Start the whole with the above? Otherwise people get tired of reading
before finding out what the point of the exercise is?
View attachment "perf-wq.c" of type "TEXT/X-CSRC" (6396 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists