| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 23:32:44 +0100 From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, laijs@...fujitsu.com, fengguang.wu@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jmoyer@...hat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] writeback: replace custom worker pool implementation with unbound workqueue On Tue 12-03-13 16:05:10, Jan Kara wrote: > On Thu 07-03-13 13:44:08, Tejun Heo wrote: > > Writeback implements its own worker pool - each bdi can be associated > > with a worker thread which is created and destroyed dynamically. The > > worker thread for the default bdi is always present and serves as the > > "forker" thread which forks off worker threads for other bdis. > > > > there's no reason for writeback to implement its own worker pool when > > using unbound workqueue instead is much simpler and more efficient. > > This patch replaces custom worker pool implementation in writeback > > with an unbound workqueue. I realized there may be one issue - so far we have a clear identification which thread works for which bdi in the thread name (flush-x:y naming). That was useful when debugging things. Now with your worker pool this is lost, am I right? Would it be possible to restore that? Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> SUSE Labs, CR -- 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