Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758112Ab0FOToG (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:44:06 -0400 Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.251]:47850 "EHLO wolverine02.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752680Ab0FOToE (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:44:04 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6014"; a="44395267" Subject: Re: Overview of concurrency managed workqueue From: Daniel Walker To: Tejun Heo Cc: mingo@elte.hu, awalls@radix.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jeff@garzik.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, cl@linux-foundation.org, dhowells@redhat.com, arjan@linux.intel.com, johannes@sipsolutions.net, oleg@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk In-Reply-To: <4C17C598.7070303@kernel.org> References: <1276551467-21246-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <4C17C598.7070303@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 12:43:57 -0700 Message-ID: <1276631037.6432.9.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1321 Lines: 33 On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 20:25 +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, all. > > So, here's the overview I wrote up today. If anything needs more > clarification, just ask. Thanks. > > == Overview > > There are many cases where an execution context is needed and there > already are several mechanisms for them. The most commonly used one > is workqueue and there are slow_work, async and a few other. Although > workqueue has been serving the kernel for quite some time now, it has > some limitations. I noticed that you removed the RT workqueue since it's no longer used, but it's possible that a user can raise the priority of a given work queue thread into real time priorities. So with single threaded, and multithreaded workqueues specific to certain areas of the kernel the user would have a greater ability to control priorities of those areas. It looks like with your patches it would remove that level of flexability effectively making all the work item the same priority with no ability to raise or lower .. Is that accurate ? btw, Thanks for the write up. Daniel -- 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/