Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 12:25:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 12:25:44 -0400 Received: from [198.149.18.6] ([198.149.18.6]:14241 "EHLO tolkor.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 12:25:42 -0400 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 19:45:29 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Ingo Molnar Cc: lord@sgi.com, Arjan van de Ven , cw@f00f.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [patch] smptimers, old BH removal, tq-cleanup, 2.5.39 Message-ID: <20020930194529.A15138@sgi.com> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Ingo Molnar , lord@sgi.com, Arjan van de Ven , cw@f00f.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds References: <20020930193713.A13195@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from mingo@elte.hu on Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 06:38:03PM +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 823 Lines: 19 On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 06:38:03PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > see the workqueues patch i posted a couple of minutes ago. Does this solve > XFS's problems? Not exactly. All your work on one queue is internally serialize. An totally unserialized workqueue would be best for XFS. > why is it ugly? I can add a simple interface to the workqueues subsystem > that will bind the XFS worker threads to given sets of CPUs. That should > give you per-CPU workqueues, with separate per-CPU locking. That would also work, but would require more code in XFS than my above suggestion. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/