[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0a69a253-3865-322c-3a6d-6f8bb1c36023@kernel.dk>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 11:17:11 -0700
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Mike Christie <michael.christie@...cle.com>, geert@...ux-m68k.org,
vverma@...italocean.com, hdanton@...a.com, hch@...radead.org,
stefanha@...hat.com, jasowang@...hat.com, mst@...hat.com,
sgarzare@...hat.com, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
christian.brauner@...ntu.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 07/10] io_uring: switch to kernel_worker
On 11/21/21 10:49 AM, Mike Christie wrote:
> Convert io_uring and io-wq to use kernel_worker.
I don't like the kernel_worker name, that implies it's always giving you
a kernel thread or kthread. That's not the io_uring use case, it's
really just a thread off the original task that just happens to never
exit to userspace.
Can we do a better name? At least io_thread doesn't imply that.
Also I do think this deserves a bit more commit message, there's really
nothing in here.
--
Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists