From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755850AbZLWNC2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Dec 2009 08:02:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755539AbZLWNC1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Dec 2009 08:02:27 -0500 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:40418 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753046AbZLWNC0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Dec 2009 08:02:26 -0500 X-Envelope-From: stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de Message-ID: <4B321458.5020804@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 14:00:08 +0100 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20091025 SeaMonkey/1.1.18 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Linus Torvalds , Tejun Heo , Peter Zijlstra , awalls@radix.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jeff@garzik.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, cl@linux-foundation.org, dhowells@redhat.com, arjan@linux.intel.com, avi@redhat.com, johannes@sipsolutions.net, andi@firstfloor.org Subject: Re: workqueue thing References: <1261141088-2014-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1261143924.20899.169.camel@laptop> <4B2EE5A5.2030208@kernel.org> <1261387377.4314.37.camel@laptop> <4B2F7879.2080901@kernel.org> <1261405604.4314.154.camel@laptop> <4B3009DC.7020407@kernel.org> <1261480001.4937.21.camel@laptop> <4B319A20.9010305@kernel.org> <20091223060229.GA14805@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20091223060229.GA14805@elte.hu> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ingo Molnar wrote: > Likewise, if there's a reduction in complexity, that is a tangible metric as > well: lets do a few conversions as part of the patch-set and see how much > simpler things have become as a result of it. There are for example about 160 users of create_singlethread_workqueue (about 140 of them in drivers/.). As has mentioned by others, many if not most of them would be better served by either the existing slow-work API or by the proposed worker thread pool. Conversion to the former takes a bit more effort than the latter (not much, but it matters). The little driver subsystem which I maintain extensively uses the shared workqueue and also one single-thread workqueue. The facts that the shared queue is used for several purposes and a single thread for some are both just compromises which I would rather like to get rid of. I should have converted the create_singlethread_workqueue usage to David Howells' slow-work infrastructure immediately when that was merged, but I didn't do so yet because there is too much else on my to-do list for that particular to-do item... > We really are not forced to the space of Gedankenexperiments here. ...to actually leave Gedankenexperiment stage as quickly as I would like. Tejun's worker pool would make things easier for me. -- Stefan Richter -=====-==--= ==-- =-=== http://arcgraph.de/sr/