Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 15 May 2014 00:50:11 -0400 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [RFC 09/16] kgr: mark task_safe in some kthreads |
| |
Hello, Mike.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 06:46:18AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > I think it'd be healthier to identify the use cases and then provide > > proper interface for it. Note that workqueue can now expose interface > > to modify concurrency, priority and cpumask to userland which > > writeback workers are already using. > > You can't identify a specific thing, any/all of it can land on the > user's diner plate, so he should be able to make the decisions. Power > to the user and all that, if he does something stupid, tuff titty. User > getting to call the shots, and getting to keep the pieces when he fscks > it all up is wonderful stuff, lets kernel people off the hook :)
Do we know specific kthreads which need to be exposed with this way? If there are good enough reasons for specific ones, sure, but I don't think "we can't change any of the kthreads because someone might be diddling with it" is something we can sustain in the long term.
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |