Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755370Ab0FSJoK (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jun 2010 05:44:10 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:60656 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755191Ab0FSJoI (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jun 2010 05:44:08 -0400 Message-ID: <4C1C911B.6040601@kernel.org> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:42:51 +0200 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100512 Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andi Kleen CC: Andy Walls , Daniel Walker , mingo@elte.hu, 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 Subject: Re: Overview of concurrency managed workqueue References: <1276697146.9309.27.camel@m0nster> <1276776066.2461.15.camel@localhost> <87vd9fo1sk.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <4C1C8263.9040404@kernel.org> <87fx0jo0z6.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <4C1C8772.8090406@kernel.org> <20100619090851.GF18946@basil.fritz.box> <4C1C8A18.2030709@kernel.org> <20100619091518.GG18946@basil.fritz.box> <4C1C8B32.1040007@kernel.org> <20100619092758.GH18946@basil.fritz.box> In-Reply-To: <20100619092758.GH18946@basil.fritz.box> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (hera.kernel.org [127.0.0.1]); Sat, 19 Jun 2010 09:42:53 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1157 Lines: 33 Hello, On 06/19/2010 11:27 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: >> Can you think of anything else which could benefit from high priority >> queueing? > > Over time we'll get more error handling, e.g. advanced NMI handling. > Maybe it could be useful for thermal handling too which is a similar > situation. > > To be honest I would prefer if there aren't that many more users, > the more users the less useful it becomes. As long as the actual frequency is low, the number of users should be okay. Okay, just one more question before adding it to todo list. Do you think it would really benefit from scalability provided by multiple workers? * Do machines ever report that many MCE errors? The usual rate seems like one per weeks or months even when they're frequent. * If a machine is actually reporting enough errors to overwhelm single error handling thread, does it even matter what we do? Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/