Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 9 Jan 2001 14:24:50 +0100 (CET) | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1 |
| |
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Stephen Landamore wrote:
> >> Sure. But sendfile is not one of the fundamental UNIX operations...
> > Neither were eg. kernel-based semaphores. So what? Unix wasnt
> Ehh, that's not correct. HP-UX was the first to implement sendfile().
i dont think we disagree. What i was referring to was the 'original' Unix idea, the 30 years old one, which did not include sendfile() :-) We never claimed that sendfile() first came up in Linux [that would be a blatant lie] - and the Linux API itself was indeed influenced by existing sendfile()/copyfile() interfaces. (at the time Linus implemented sendfile() there already existed several similar interfaces.)
> For the record, sendfile() exists because we (Zeus) asked HP for it.
good move :-) [honestly.]
> (So of course we agree that sendfile is important!)
:-) I think sendfile() should also have its logical extensions: receivefile(). I dont know how the HPUX implementation works, but in Linux, right now it's only possible to sendfile() from a file to a socket. The logical extension of this is to allow socket->file IO and file->file, socket->socket IO as well. (the later one could be interesting for things like web proxies.)
Ingo
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |