Re: kernel processes - are they really needed?

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Ram <vshrirama@...>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 - 3:43 pm

Ram <vshrirama@gmail.com> writes:



Some of them can probably. Or rather many depending on the configuration.

Sometimes there are good reasons for an own thread, but often there are also 
bad reasons.

If the threads don't sleep or have special requirements long they
should generally just use keventd instead.

Unfortunately a lot of people seem to think they're cheap because 
it's relatively easy to create them using work queues now, so we end
up with more and more all the time.

Especially on systems with many cores or threads which end up with a
lot of dubious per CPU threads. Some scaling up is needed, but one per CPU 
seems to be generally too many.

My favourite for a ridiculous thread was and is "kpsmoused" 

-Andi
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
kernel processes - are they really needed?, Ram, (Wed Oct 24, 9:37 am)
Re: kernel processes - are they really needed?, Jan Kara, (Wed Oct 31, 12:01 pm)
Re: kernel processes - are they really needed?, Matthias Kaehlcke, (Wed Oct 31, 1:10 pm)
Re: kernel processes - are they really needed?, Andi Kleen, (Wed Oct 24, 3:43 pm)
Re: kernel processes - are they really needed?, Dmitry Torokhov, (Wed Oct 31, 12:35 pm)
Re: kernel processes - are they really needed?, Andi Kleen, (Wed Oct 31, 1:33 pm)
Re: kernel processes - are they really needed?, Dmitry Torokhov, (Thu Nov 1, 9:51 pm)
Re: kernel processes - are they really needed?, linux-os (Dick Johnson), (Wed Oct 24, 11:30 am)