[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190611195210.GK3341036@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 12:52:10 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>, hannes@...xchg.org,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, lizefan@...wei.com, bsd@...hat.com,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, dave.hansen@...el.com,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, mhocko@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
steven.sistare@...cle.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
tom.hromatka@...cle.com, vdavydov.dev@...il.com,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 0/5] cgroup-aware unbound workqueues
Hello,
On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 09:15:26AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > Can you please go into more details on the use cases?
>
> If I remember correctly, the original Bandan's work was about using
> workqueues instead of kthreads in vhost.
For vhosts, I think it might be better to stick with kthread or
kthread_worker given that they can consume lots of cpu cycles over a
long period of time and we want to keep persistent track of scheduling
states.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists