On Tue, 14 Apr 1998 20:02:09 +0200 (MET DST), Rik van Riel
<H.H.vanRiel@fys.ruu.nl> said:
> On Tue, 7 Apr 1998, Perry Harrington wrote:
>> Threads
>> are useful in their appropriate context, and kswapd, and kmod would benefit
>> from them.
> Hmm, maybe it would be useful for kswapd and bdflush to fork()
> off threads to do the actual disk I/O, so the main thread won't
> be blocked and paused... This could remove some bottlenecks.
bdflush does nothing except IO, so there's no real reason to
twin-thread it. kswapd does indeed benefit from a separate IO thread,
and I've already got patches which implement a kswiod for IO and a
kswapd for page scanning. I'll post them once I've got them ready
against the latest kernel: my current patches for this code are pretty
old.
--Stephen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu