From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161016AbXBZUbd (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2007 15:31:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161022AbXBZUbd (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2007 15:31:33 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:39317 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161016AbXBZUbc (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2007 15:31:32 -0500 Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:23:38 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Evgeniy Polyakov Cc: Davide Libenzi , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linus Torvalds , Arjan van de Ven , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , Alan Cox , Ulrich Drepper , Zach Brown , "David S. Miller" , Suparna Bhattacharya , Jens Axboe , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: threadlets as 'naive pool of threads', epoll, some measurements Message-ID: <20070226202338.GA23357@elte.hu> References: <20070225192112.GA15681@elte.hu> <20070225194645.GB1353@2ka.mipt.ru> <20070225195308.GC15681@elte.hu> <20070225213420.GA10195@elte.hu> <20070226104507.GA18470@elte.hu> <20070226114858.GA28836@elte.hu> <20070226122521.GA19039@2ka.mipt.ru> <20070226125054.GA6997@elte.hu> <20070226143201.GB31629@2ka.mipt.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070226143201.GB31629@2ka.mipt.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.1.7 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > no. Please read the evserver_threadlet.c code. There's no kevent in > > there. There's no epoll() in there. All that you can see there is > > the natural behavior of pure threadlets. And it's not a workload /I/ > > picked for threadlets - it is a workload, filesize, parallelism > > level and request handling function /you/ picked for > > "event-servers". > > I know that there is no kevents there, that would be really strange if > you would test it in your environment after all that empty kevent > releases. i havent got around figuring out the last v2.6.20 based kevent release, and your git tree is v2.6.21-rc1 based. Do you have some easy URL for me to fetch the last v2.6.20 kevent release? > Enough, you say micro-thread design is superior - ok, that is your > point. note that threadlets are not 'micro-threads'. A threadlet is more of an 'optional thread' (as i mentioned it earlier): whenever it does anything that makes it distinct from a plain function call, it's converted into a separate thread by the kernel. Otherwise it behaves like a plain function call and returns. Ingo