Re: [PATCH 34/35] async: use workqueue for worker pool

[Arjan van de Ven]

On 6/29/2010 11:34 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 06/29/2010 08:22 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>    
> > I'm not trying to suggest "unbound".  I'm trying to suggest "don't
> > start bounding until you hit # threads>= # cpus you have some
> > clever tricks to deal with bounding things; but lets make sure that
> > the simple case of having less work to run in parallel than the
> > number of cpus gets dealt with simple and unbound.
> >      
> Well, the thing is, for most cases, binding to cpus is simply better.
>    

depends on the user.

For "throw over the wall" work, this is unclear.
Especially in the light of hyperthreading (sharing L1 cache) or even 
modern cpus (where many cores share a fast L3 cache).

I'm fine with a solution that has the caller say 'run anywhere' vs 'try 
to run local'.
I suspect there will be many many cases of 'run anywhere'.isn't hard at 
all. I just wanna know whether it's something which is

> actually useful.  So, where would that be useful?
>    

I think it's useful for all users of your worker pool, not (just) async.

it's a severe limitation of the current linux infrastructure, and your 
infrastructure has the chance to fix this...

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/