On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 02:55:51PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 06:01:18PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > 1) Call a per workqueue mutex when a work execute on an ordered workqueue.
> > Although
> > contention should be very rare (only while we replace the workqueue at
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 06:01:18PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 1) Call a per workqueue mutex when a work execute on an ordered workqueue.
> Although
> contention should be very rare (only while we replace the workqueue attrs
> and
> switch to a new worker), frequent locking may have a
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:08:39PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Frederic Weisbecker writes:
>
> > We call "anon workqueues" the set of unbound workqueues that don't
> > carry the WQ_SYSFS flag.
> >
> > They are a problem nowaday because people who work on CPU isolation
> > (HPC, Real time, etc...
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:08:39PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Frederic Weisbecker writes:
>
> > We call "anon workqueues" the set of unbound workqueues that don't
> > carry the WQ_SYSFS flag.
> >
> > They are a problem nowaday because people who work on CPU isolation
> > (HPC, Real time, etc...
Frederic Weisbecker writes:
> We call "anon workqueues" the set of unbound workqueues that don't
> carry the WQ_SYSFS flag.
>
> They are a problem nowaday because people who work on CPU isolation
> (HPC, Real time, etc...) want to be able to migrate all the unbound
> workqueues away to a single C
We call "anon workqueues" the set of unbound workqueues that don't
carry the WQ_SYSFS flag.
They are a problem nowaday because people who work on CPU isolation
(HPC, Real time, etc...) want to be able to migrate all the unbound
workqueues away to a single CPU. This control is possible through sysf
6 matches
Mail list logo
