lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [Ksummit-2008-discuss] Delayed interrupt work, thread pools
From
Date
On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 03:12 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> writes:
>
> > The question is: is that significantly less overhead than just spawning
> > a new full blown kernel thread ? enough to justify the complexity ? at
> > the end of the day, it means allocating a stack (which on ppc64 is still
> > 16K, I know it sucks)...
>
> I looked at this a while ago. And right now kernel_thread is fairly light.
> kthread_create has latency issues because we need to queue up a task on
> our kernel thread spawning daemon, and let it fork the child. Needing
> to go via the kthread spawning daemon didn't look fundamental, just something
> that was a challenge to sort out.

Yes. I was thinking that if it becomes an issue, we could special case
something in the scheduler to pop them.

Ben.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-07-03 13:59    [W:0.034 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site