Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:41:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:41:23 -0500 Received: from neon-gw.transmeta.com ([209.10.217.66]:12816 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:41:17 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 10:10:48 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Alexander Viro cc: Alan Cox , Jeff Garzik , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: PATCH: 8139too kernel thread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Alexander Viro wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > The only disadvantage to this scheme is the added cost of a kernel > > > thread over a kernel timer. I think this is an ok cost, because this > > > is a low-impact thread that sleeps a lot.. > > > > 8K of memory, two tlb flushes, cache misses on the scheduler. The price is > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > actually extremely high. > > > Does it really need non-lazy TLB? If Alan wants to back-port it into 2.2.x, the lazy tlb won't work. But yes, on 2.4.x the cost of threads is fairly low. The biggest cost by far is probably the locking needed for the scheduler etc, and there the best rule of thumb is probably to see whether the driver really ends up being noticeably simpler. The event stuff that we are discussing for pcmcia may make all of this moot, maybe media selection is the perfect example of how to do the very same thing. I'll forward Jeff the emails on that. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/