Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:50:03 +0200 | From | Lars Marowsky-Bree <> | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] Minneapolis Cluster Summit, July 29-30 |
| |
On 2004-07-12T12:28:19, Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@redhat.com> said:
> > Sure, but the network IO is isolated from the main process via a _very > > careful_ non-blocking IO using sockets library, so that works out well. > ... which of course never allocates skb's ? ;)
No, the interprocess communication does not; it's local sockets. I think Alan (Robertson) even has a paper on this. It's really quite well engineered, with a non-blocking poll() implementation based on signals and stuff. Oh well.
> > But again, I'd rather like to see this solved (memory pools for > > userland, PF_ etc), because it's relevant for many scenarios requiring > PF_ is not enough really ;) > You need to force GFP_NOFS etc for several critical parts, and well, by > being in kernel you can avoid a bunch of these allocations for real, and/or > influence their GFP flags
True enough, but I'm somewhat unhappy with this still. So whenever we have something like that we need to move it into the kernel space? (pvmove first, and now the clustering etc.) Can't we come up with a way to export this flag to user-space?
Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb@suse.de>
-- High Availability & Clustering \ ever tried. ever failed. no matter. SUSE Labs, Research and Development | try again. fail again. fail better. SUSE LINUX AG - A Novell company \ -- Samuel Beckett
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |