lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: sendfile(2) behaviour has changed ?
From
   From: Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 12:10:46 +0300

On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 10:49:08AM +0200, Zilvinas Valinskas wrote:
> Is this expected behaviour ? that sendfile(2) on 2.5.4x linux kernel requires
> socket as an output fd paramter ?

It has only been intended for output to a TCP stream socket.

To be honest, I'm not so sure about this.

For example, I definitely see us supporting this in the
opposite direction when commodity 10gbit hits the market.

Initially I thought "sys_receivefile()" but it makes no
sense when we have a system call that is perfectly capable
of describing the tcp_socket --> page_cache operation.

And I don't think the vfs copy operation using sendfile
is such a bad thing either. It definitely opens the door
for some interesting optimizations. For example, if the
source page is not mapped by a process it could be possible
to just unhash it, mark it dirty, then hash it into the
destination file. Exactly 2 I/O operations and the cpu
doesn't touch the data at all.
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:30    [W:0.075 / U:0.644 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site