Re: tasklet v/s kernel thread

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



proper comparison should be tasklet vs workqueue.   this is because
kernel thread creation has a "do_fork()" that will load the executable
image into memory .... resource intensive...but what u do is to create
workqueue...which will submit its work to a running kernel thread to
be executed instead....no repeated creation of kernel thread.

by design, tasklet is bottom-half in its characteristics - cannot be
delayed, no switching of CPU, no sleep function, all the time critical
stuff etc.   but workqueue will be scheduled when CPU is busy etc.

But if u want to compare tasklet and workqueue here is a good writeup summary:

http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/419651?search_string=%26quot%3Btasklets%20vs.%20workqueues%26quot%3B;#419651

Key message quoted here:

Normally, there is little decision between work queues or sotftirqs/tasklets.
If the deferred work need to sleep, work queues are used. If the deferred
work need not sleep, softirqs or tasklets are used.

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Lal <learner.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Which one is faster between a tasklet and kernel thread in terms of
> scheduling (i.e. who will be scheduled first?)
>
> -Lal

-- 
Regards,
Peter Teoh

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with
"unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ


[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [Linux Kernel Mentors]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [IETF Annouce]     [Git]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ACPI]
  Powered by Linux