lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [patch 00/13] Syslets, "Threadlets", generic AIO support, v3
    On Wed, 28 Feb 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

    > On Wed, 28 Feb 2007, Davide Libenzi wrote:
    > >
    > > Here we very much agree. The way I'd like it:
    > >
    > > struct async_syscall {
    > > unsigned long nr_sysc;
    > > unsigned long params[8];
    > > long result;
    > > };
    >
    > No, the "result" needs to go somewhere else. The caller may be totally
    > uninterested in keeping the system call number or parameters around until
    > the operation completes, but if you put them in the same structure with
    > the result, you obviously cannot sanely get rid of them.
    >
    > I also don't much like read-write interfaces (which the above would be:
    > the kernel would read most of the structure, and then write one member of
    > the structure).
    >
    > It's entirely possible, for example, that the operation we submit is some
    > legacy "aio_read()", which has soem other structure layout than the new
    > one (but one field will be the result code).

    Ok, makes sense. Something like this then?

    struct async_syscall {
    unsigned long nr_sysc;
    unsigned long params[8];
    long *result;
    };

    And what would async_wait() return bak? Pointers to "struct async_syscall"
    or pointers to "result"?



    - Davide


    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-02-28 19:53    [W:0.020 / U:0.796 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site