On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 18:45 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 08/06, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > still this does not change the fundamental issue of a high prio piece of > > work waiting on a lower prio task. > ^^^^^^^ > waiting. This is a "key" word, and this was my (perhaps wrong) point. Yeah, its having a higher prio item processed at a lower prio that is the problem. It might be delayed by less important issues. But I'm feeling a question wanting to jump out of your statement, I just fail to find it. > > > I suspect most of the barrier/flush semantics could be replaced with > > > completions from specific work items. > > Hm. But this is exactly how it works? Ah, I fail to be clear :-/ Yes, barriers work by enqueueing work and waiting for that one work item to fall out, thereby knowing that all previous work has been completed. My point was that most flushes are there to wait for a previously enqueued work item, and might as well wait for that one. Let me try to illustrate: a regular pattern is, we enqueue work A and then flush the whole queue to ensure A is processed. So instead of enqueueing A, then B in the barrier code, and wait for B to pop out, we might as well wait for A to begin with. - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Gregory Haskins <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Gregory Haskins <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Gregory Haskins <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- Prev by Date: Re: Disk spin down issue on shut down/suspend to disk
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] fix IDE legacy mode resource
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
- Index(es):
 |