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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
