[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [perfmon] Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 merge news
    David Miller writes:

    > The same way we handle some of the multicast "getsockopt()"
    > calls. The parameters passed in are both inputs and outputs.

    For a read??!!!

    > For the above example:
    > struct pmd_info {
    > int *pmd_numbers;
    > u64 *pmd_values;
    > int n;
    > } *p;
    > buffer_size = N;
    > p = malloc(buffer_size);
    > p->pmd_numbers = p + foo;
    > p->pmd_values = p + bar;
    > p->n = whatever(N);
    > err = read(fd, p, N);

    You're suggesting that the behaviour of a read() should depend on what
    was in the buffer before the read? Gack! Surely you have better
    taste than that?

    Or are you saying that a read (or write) has a side-effect of altering
    some other area of memory besides the buffer you give to read()? That
    seems even worse to me.

    > Another alternative is to use generic netlink.

    Then you end up with two system calls to get the data rather than one
    (one to send the request and another to read the reply). For
    something that needs to be quick that is a suboptimal interface.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-11-14 13:07    [W:0.020 / U:32.272 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site