Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:50:28 -0800 (PST) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |