From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulrich Drepper Subject: Re: [take25 1/6] kevent: Description. Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 07:26:51 -0800 Message-ID: <45670F3B.2000503@redhat.com> References: <11641265982190@2ka.mipt.ru> <456621AC.7000009@redhat.com> <45662522.9090101@garzik.org> <45663298.7000108@redhat.com> <45664160.6060504@cosmosbay.com> <20061124001412.371ec4e7.akpm@osdl.org> <4566AE48.70409@cosmosbay.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Andrew Morton , Jeff Garzik , Evgeniy Polyakov , David Miller , netdev , Zach Brown , Christoph Hellwig , Chase Venters , Johann Borck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:10952 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934840AbWKXP16 (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Nov 2006 10:27:58 -0500 To: Eric Dumazet In-Reply-To: <4566AE48.70409@cosmosbay.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Eric Dumazet wrote: > Being able to direct a particular request on a particular CPU is=20 > certainly something that cannot be hardcoded in 'the new kevent inter= face'. Nobody is proposing this. Although I have proposed that if the kernel=20 knows which CPU can best service a request it might hint as much. But in general, you're free to decentralize as much as you want. But=20 this does not mean it should not also be possible to use a number of=20 threads in the same loop and the same kevent queue. That's the part=20 which needs designing, the separate queues will always be possible. --=20 =E2=9E=A7 Ulrich Drepper =E2=9E=A7 Red Hat, Inc. =E2=9E=A7 444 Castro S= t =E2=9E=A7 Mountain View, CA =E2=9D=96