From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: J?rn Engel <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>
Cc: Pierre Ossman <drzeus-list@drzeus.cx>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>, Dominik Brodowski <linux@brodo.de>,
Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Subject: Re: feature-removal-schedule obsoletes
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:32:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061031193212.GC26625@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061031155756.GA23021@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 04:57:56PM +0100, J?rn Engel wrote:
> On Sat, 28 October 2006 10:34:51 +0200, Pierre Ossman wrote:
> >
> > What should be used to replace it? The MMC block driver uses it to
> > manage the block device queue. I am not that intimate with the block
> > layer so I do not know the proper fix.
>
> Why does the MMC block driver use a thread? Is there a technical
> reason for this or could it be done in original process context as
> well, removing some code and useless cpu scheduler overhead?
As I understand it, there is no guarantee that a block drivers request
function will be called in process context - it could be called in
interrupt context.
The MMC subsystem needs process context to issue commands since the
process of issuing commands entails various sleeps. Hence why the
MMC block has its own process context.
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-31 19:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-15 14:32 feature-removal-schedule obsoletes Jiri Slaby
2006-10-15 15:05 ` Jean Delvare
2006-10-16 13:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-10-24 19:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-10-24 19:28 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-10-24 20:55 ` Jörn Engel
2006-10-28 8:34 ` Pierre Ossman
2006-10-28 10:06 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-10-28 10:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-11-13 15:15 ` Pierre Ossman
2006-11-13 18:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-10-31 15:57 ` Jörn Engel
2006-10-31 19:32 ` Russell King [this message]
2006-10-31 21:41 ` Jörn Engel
2006-10-31 20:20 ` Pierre Ossman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061031193212.GC26625@flint.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=drzeus-list@drzeus.cx \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jirislaby@gmail.com \
--cc=joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de \
--cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=laforge@netfilter.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@brodo.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox