Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758888Ab0FPOFt (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2010 10:05:49 -0400 Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:47242 "EHLO wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758720Ab0FPOFr (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2010 10:05:47 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6014"; a="44612292" 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: <4C18D574.1040903@kernel.org> References: <1276551467-21246-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <4C17C598.7070303@kernel.org> <1276631037.6432.9.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> <4C18BF40.40607@kernel.org> <1276694825.9309.12.camel@m0nster> <4C18D1FD.9060804@kernel.org> <1276695665.9309.17.camel@m0nster> <4C18D574.1040903@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 07:05:46 -0700 Message-ID: <1276697146.9309.27.camel@m0nster> 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: 1195 Lines: 27 On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 15:45 +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: > On 06/16/2010 03:41 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > > Any workqueue that has a thread which can be prioritized from userspace. > > As long as there is a thread it can usually be given a priority from > > userspace, so any _current_ workqueue which uses a single thread or > > multiple threads is an example of what I'm talking about. > > Eh... what's the use case for that? That's just so wrong. What do > you do after a suspend/resume cycle? Reprioritize all of them from > suspend/resume hooks? The use case is any situation when the user wants to give higher priority to some set of work items, and there's nothing wrong with that. In fact there has been a lot of work in the RT kernel related to workqueue prioritization .. suspend/resume shouldn't touch the thread priorities unless your tearing down the threads and remaking them each suspend/resume cycle from inside the kernel. 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/