linux-kernel - Re: Work queue questions

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120921194035.GK7264@google.com>
Date:	Fri, 21 Sep 2012 12:40:35 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Deepawali Verma <dverma249@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Work queue questions

Hello, Deepawali.

On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 08:35:13PM +0100, Deepawali Verma wrote:
> These three tasks are writing the three chunks of data in parallel. I
> am not getting improvement here otherwise what is difference between
> writing these chunks one by one in single thread instead of trying to
> write the data by scheduling the work on three different workqueues
> means 3 worker threads?

Workqueue is designed to supply sufficient concurrency for such use
cases and it has been doing so for all other in-kernel users for quite
some time now.  If you're not getting concurrency in the above
scenario, either you've found a bug in workqueue or you did something
wrong.  If you have a scenario not working for you, please post the
code.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/