Re: [OT] Re: 2.4.7: wtf is "ksoftirqd_CPU0"

[Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>]

On Sunday 22 July 2001 01:53, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 01:37:02AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > On Saturday 21 July 2001 18:38, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > "peter k." wrote:
> > > > i just installed 2.4.7, now a new process called
> > > > "ksoftirqd_CPU0" is started automatically when booting (by the
> > > > kernel obviously)? why? what does it do? i didnt find any
> > > > useful information on it in linuxdoc / linux-kernel archives
> > >
> > > it is used internally, ignore it.
> >
> > It's pretty hard to ignore a process with a name that ugly ;-)
> >
> > How about just ksoft0 ?  Or kirq0?
>
> Now this is just getting silly.  It follows the same convention the
> 6-8 other k* daemons follow.  Would you want kswpd? kupd? kreclmd? 
> Probably not.

Err, wasn't I arguing *against* trying to encode whole sentences in the 
daemon names?  Personally, I have a similar distaste for naming 
strategies that involve leaving out the vowels.

And no, I don't really like kirq or ksoft very much either.

I'd like to see the following in my ps -A list:

  kupdate
  kflush
  kinterrupt

Something like that.  We don't need d's at the ends because we have k's 
at the beginnings, don't you think?  I can see the logic for appending 
numbers to per-processor daemons, but as for doing it even on UP 
kernels, it's not so obviously a good idea.

As far as 'naming conventions' for daemons go, they went out the window 
when kflushd became bdflush.

--
Daniel