On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Ming Lei wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:10 AM, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Also the tasklet running in CPU0 can handle the work which should > >> have been done by the same tasket scheduled in CPU1, so we can > >> avoid busy-waitting in CPU1 which may be introduced by tasklet_schedule() > >> in CPU1. > > > > Or you could have a separate tasklet for each host controller. > > Yes, but I will compare tasklet with interrupt threaded handler first. Yes, please. I read through the thread and I really recommend that you get rid of the tasklet. tasklets are a complete disaster by design and we really should make efforts to get rid of the last users instead of trying to work around their semantical shortcomings. Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
