From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:06:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:06:16 -0500 Received: from smtp-out.comcast.net ([24.153.64.116]:41515 "EHLO smtp.comcast.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:06:15 -0500 Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:14:37 -0500 From: J S Subject: Tasklets vs. Task Queues for Deferred Processing To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Message-id: <1048893277.4058.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> Organization: MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.3 Content-type: text/plain Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I'm trying to defer some processing to a later point. I'm in a softirq, so in_interrupt() returns true. I need to schedule some work for later, in process context. I have read in the O'Reilly linux device drivers book that tasklets always run in interrupt time. Also, I guess the only task_queue that is in process context is the scheduler task queue. I've seen in a few places that task queues are on their way out and tasklets are being used instead. Is this completely true? Should I consider task queues as a deprecated method of deferred processing?` What other deferred processing methods can I use that will run in process context? Thanks, Josh