[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b41fcb8e7f7deafe8f8f4c708daf81d4@gatzka.org>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 15:06:27 +0200
From: Stephan Gatzka <stephan.gatzka@...il.com>
To: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: function call fw_iso_resource_mange(..) (core-iso.c) does not return
> Solution 2 --- Perform interdependent works in different queue
> instances.
> (Keep the WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag set at those workqueues that have to take
> work which is necessary for progress of memory reclaim. If this and
> only
> this solution is employed for an SBP-2 initiator, we need two if not
> more
> WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueue instances.)
I would go for this solution. I have no problems with lots of workqueues
around, because there is only a relatively small structure required for
each workqueue.
>
> Solution 3 --- Remove the dependency between worklets:
>
> Solution 3a --- Remove the lower-level worklet altogether.
> E.g. reimplement the lower-level worklet as a tasklet.
No, I like the workqueue context. :)
> Solution 3b --- Remove the higher-level worklet's dependency.
> E.g. reimplement the higher-level worklet such that it is woken by
> a timer and then aborts or reschedules ( = lets the lower-level
> worklet bubble up in the queue).
This looks more difficult to me and not so easy to test.
Stephan
--
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