Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: The priority of ksoftirqd and workqueue!
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 14:01:00 +0100
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <87a9no4hdf.fsf@sapphire.mobileactivedefense.com>
References: <54528921-f3ef-406f-88c6-0cfc936fbcc9@y36g2000pra.googlegroups.com> <30bf9ac6-0a06-45e3-a8b3-1baa7e008475@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: individual.net s+ubaXWWsekkDQryeD1fcggp4pOwjWbeCS8QNaIGTJeO6eMdk=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:QI3LNU1MY+cRpsY8TdnQjlDXpRY= sha1:ho5CvaEeL4zFFjVd7RY58d60mBQ=
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux)
Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.development.system:501

om <orit.mosko@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sunday, March 13, 2011 3:57:51 PM UTC+2, demiahn wrote:
>> I use 2.6.32 kernel.
>> I'd like to know the priority of ksoftirqd and workqueue.
>> Who's priority is higher between ksoftirqd and workqueue?
>
> Did you find the answer? I'm looking for answer to this question too

According to top-output on a system with a sufficiently recent kernel,
the priorities of both 'kinds' of kernel threads are identical.