On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 04:33:57 -0400 Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 03:05:56 -0400 Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> My main > >> worry with keventd is that we might get stuck behind an unrelated > >> process for an undefined length of time. > > > > I don't think it has ever been demonstrated that keventd latency is > > excessive, or a problem. I guess we could instrument it and fix stuff > > easily enough. > > It's simple math, combined with user expectations. > > On a 1-CPU or 2-CPU box, if you have three or more tasks, all of which > are doing hardware reset tasks that could take 30-60 seconds (realistic > for libata, SCSI and network drivers, at least), then OBVIOUSLY you have > other tasks blocked for that length of time. Well that obviously would be a dumb way to use keventd. One would need to do schedule_work(), kick off the reset then do schedule_delayed_work() to wait (or poll) for its termination. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
