On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Davide Libenzi wrote: > On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 04:41:58PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > Yeah, of course. I do not plan revolutions. Just asking if it's a > > > possible > > > thing to do. I can mlock the userspace ring, if imposing that burden over > > > aio_complete() is seen as too heavy. > > > > I'm not sure I follow what you're doing -- why isn't asyncfd merely calling > > io_getevents() instead of reinventing everything the ringbuffer does? The > > aio ringbuffer is already locked in memory. Fwiw, the aio ringbuffer was > > originally wired up to a file descriptor, but that gave way to the actual > > syscall in order to enforce proper typechecking and typical usage scenarios > > with timeouts. > > The purpose of asyncfd is to provide a pollable (by the mean of > f_op->poll) device that can be hosted inside a standard select/poll/epoll > wait subsystem, and that, at the same time, provide a zero-copy way for > kernel code (KAIO and syslets/threadlets were my thought) to deliver > results to userspace.
But, yeah. It can end up calling io_getevents() instead of doing it's own thing. That'd make it even slimmer ;) - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
