Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762862AbXF1Pyu (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jun 2007 11:54:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755909AbXF1Pym (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jun 2007 11:54:42 -0400 Received: from ms-smtp-04.nyroc.rr.com ([24.24.2.58]:58467 "EHLO ms-smtp-04.nyroc.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752289AbXF1Pym (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jun 2007 11:54:42 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 11:54:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Steven Rostedt X-X-Sender: rostedt@gandalf.stny.rr.com To: Alexey Kuznetsov cc: Ingo Molnar , Jeff Garzik , Linus Torvalds , LKML , Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner , Christoph Hellwig , john stultz , Oleg Nesterov , "Paul E. McKenney" , Dipankar Sarma , "David S. Miller" , matthew.wilcox@hp.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Convert all tasklets to workqueues In-Reply-To: <20070628143850.GA11780@ms2.inr.ac.ru> Message-ID: References: <20070622040014.234651401@goodmis.org> <20070622204058.GA11777@elte.hu> <20070622215953.GA22917@elte.hu> <46834BB8.1020007@garzik.org> <20070628092340.GB23566@elte.hu> <20070628143850.GA11780@ms2.inr.ac.ru> 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 Content-Length: 1478 Lines: 35 On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote: > > the context-switch argument i'll believe if i see numbers. You'll > > probably need in excess of tens of thousands of irqs/sec to even be able > > to measure its overhead. (workqueues are driven by nice kernel threads > > so there's no TLB overhead, etc.) > > It was authors of the patch who were supposed to give some numbers, > at least one or two, just to prove the concept. :-) The problem is that we don't have the hardware that uses tasklets in critical ways. My original patch series had a debug print in every function (tasklet_schedule and friends). I got a few scattered prints on all my boxes but no flooding of prints. So I can't show that this will hurt, because on my boxes it does not. > > You could set realtime prioriry by default, not a poor nice -5. > If some network adapters were killed just because I run some task > with nice --22, it would be just ridiculous. This is my fault to the patch series. I compelety forgot to up the prio. My next series will include a change where the tasklet work queue will run at something like prio FIFO 98 (or maybe 99?) This is a bit embarrassing that I forgot to do this, since I'm a real-time developer ;-) -- Steve - 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/