Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/19] workqueue: implement concurrency managed
 workqueue
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, jeff@garzik.org, mingo@elte.hu,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com,
       rusty@rustcorp.com.au, cl@linux-foundation.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
       arjan@linux.intel.com
In-Reply-To: <20091001074959.dbdf6f6a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
References: <1254384558-1018-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>
	 <1254384558-1018-20-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>
	 <20091001074959.dbdf6f6a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 10:49:39 +0200
Message-Id: <1254646179.26976.10.camel@twins>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 796
Lines: 16

On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 07:49 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> This approach would appear to rule out the option of setting a work
> thread's state (scheduling policy, scheduling priority, uid, etc) to
> anything other than some default.
> 
> I guess that's unlikely to be a problem if we haven't yet had a need to
> do that, but I'd be a bit surprised to discover that nobody has done
> that sort of thing yet?  Nobody has niced up their workqueue threads?

-rt actually used to do PI on worklets, and that sure flipped the
scheduling class around a lot.
--
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/