[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YkKnlUUsufZPiZxM@linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 08:30:45 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>,
Steven Walter <stevenrwalter@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
André Pribil <a.pribil@...k-ipc.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] RT scheduling policies for workqueues
On 2022-03-28 07:39:25 [-1000], Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
Hi,
> I wonder whether it'd be useful to provide a set of wrappers which can make
> switching between workqueue and kworker easy. Semantics-wise, they're
> already mostly aligned and it shouldn't be too difficult to e.g. make an
> unbounded workqueue be backed by a dedicated kthread_worker instead of
> shared pool depending on a flag, or even allow switching dynamically.
This could work. For the tty layer it could use 'lowlatency' attribute
to decide which implementation makes sense.
> Thanks.
>
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists