Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2006 18:49:46 +0100 From: "Attilio Rao" <attilio@freebsd.org> To: perforce@freebsd.org, "Paolo Pisati" <piso@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 111336 for review Message-ID: <3bbf2fe10612090949m57552a6bp8c5026bee1206b35@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200612091726.kB9HQ2tW029475@repoman.freebsd.org> References: <200612091726.kB9HQ2tW029475@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2006/12/9, Paolo Pisati <piso@freebsd.org>: > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=111336 > > Change 111336 by piso@piso_newluxor on 2006/12/09 17:25:17 > > Add a private per handler ithread for every filtered driver. Nice shot. When piso@ and I spoke about this I was suggested, if empirically we see a possible form of parallelism not happening too seldomly for the handlers, to use group of handlers which can run concurrently and to give a kthread for any group. The "split & group" operation might be done by the driver developer and I don't really know if it is worth it. Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3bbf2fe10612090949m57552a6bp8c5026bee1206b35>