From: Ingo Oeser <ingo.oeser@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de>
To: "Grover, Andrew" <andrew.grover@intel.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
ACPI mailing list <acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ACPI] acpi_os_queue_for_execution()
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 13:23:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030105132354.G628@nightmaster.csn.tu-chemnitz.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F760B14C9561B941B89469F59BA3A84725A107@orsmsx401.jf.intel.com>; from andrew.grover@intel.com on Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 11:00:04AM -0800
Hi Andrew,
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 11:00:04AM -0800, Grover, Andrew wrote:
> > From: Pavel Machek [mailto:pavel@ucw.cz]
> > Acpi seems to create short-lived kernel threads, and I don't quite
> > understand why.
[...]
> > and acpi_thermal_run creates kernel therad that runs
> > acpi_thermal_check. Why is not acpi_thermal_check called directly? I
> > don't like idea of thread being created every time thermal zone needs
> > to be polled...
>
> Are we allowed to block in a timer callback? One of the things
> thermal_check does is call a control method, which in turn can be very
> slow, sleep, etc., so I'd guess that's why the code tries to execute
> things in its own thread.
No you just have to switch completely to schedule_work() as you
do for calls from interrupts. The limitations you mention in
osl.c for this function are lifted (look at linux/kernel/workqueue.c) and
we have per CPU workqueues now.
So no need for this uglification and less code to maintain for
you ;-)
The short lived threads are not necessary anymore. If this
thermal check will happen often an extra permanent thread for
this, which is kicked by a timer might be more apropriate here.
That thread could be started, once the thermal control is loaded.
Regards
Ingo Oeser
--
Science is what we can tell a computer. Art is everything else. --- D.E.Knuth
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-05 18:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-03 19:00 Grover, Andrew
2003-01-04 22:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
2003-01-05 12:23 ` Ingo Oeser [this message]
2003-01-06 11:12 ` Pavel Machek
2003-01-06 11:44 ` Andrew Morton
2003-01-06 12:58 ` Andrew McGregor
2003-01-06 17:26 ` Faye Pearson
2003-01-07 14:23 peter.holmes
2003-01-08 9:47 ` Faye Pearson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030105132354.G628@nightmaster.csn.tu-chemnitz.de \
--to=ingo.oeser@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de \
--cc=acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=andrew.grover@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®