From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 03:01:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 03:01:39 -0500 Received: from mailout07.sul.t-online.com ([194.25.134.83]:60036 "EHLO mailout07.sul.t-online.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 03:01:38 -0500 Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 09:12:51 +0100 From: Juergen Quade To: J S Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Tasklets vs. Task Queues for Deferred Processing Message-ID: <20030329081251.GA6604@hsnr.de> References: <1048893277.4058.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1048893277.4058.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 06:14:37PM -0500, J S wrote: > 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 True. > task queues as a deprecated method of deferred processing?` What other > deferred processing methods can I use that will run in process context? Beside application triggered driver functions (open, close, read, write ...) you can (only) use kernel threads. You can use "pure" kernel threads, workqueues or especially the kevent-daemon (2.4.x) or the event-workqueue (2.5.x). If you only need to call something like a short function, use the work queue. Need more info? Juergen.