From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 13:49:54 +0200 Message-ID: <20070806114954.GC1903@elte.hu> References: <1185992994.2636.142.camel@imap.mvista.com> <20070801201802.GA225@tv-sign.ru> <1186000468.2636.168.camel@imap.mvista.com> <20070801205053.GA263@tv-sign.ru> <1186002783.9513.228.camel@ghaskins-t60p.haskins.net> <20070801213422.GA280@tv-sign.ru> <1186005598.9513.261.camel@ghaskins-t60p.haskins.net> <20070801222201.GA316@tv-sign.ru> <1186012439.9513.321.camel@ghaskins-t60p.haskins.net> <20070802195049.GA361@tv-sign.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Gregory Haskins , Daniel Walker , Peter Zijlstra , linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Oleg Nesterov Return-path: Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:60868 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753670AbXHFLuM (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Aug 2007 07:50:12 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070802195049.GA361@tv-sign.ru> Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org * Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 08/01, Gregory Haskins wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 02:22 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > > No, > > > > You sure are a confident one ;) > > Yeah, this is a rare case when I am very sure I am right ;) > > I strongly believe you guys take a _completely_ wrong approach. > queue_work() should _not_ take the priority of the caller into > account, this is bogus. Oleg, i'd like to make it sure that the role of Gregory Haskins is clear here: he submitted some new infrastructure into the -rt tree, and i reviewed that but found it quite complex and duplicative and suggested him to think about enhancing workqueues with priority properties - which might or might not make sense. It is not the intention of the -rt project to pester any upstream maintainer with -rt issues if that upstream maintainer is not interested in it ... so please just forget about all this if you are not interested in it, we'll sort it out within -rt. Thanks, Ingo