Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:42:26 -0400 | From | Benjamin LaHaise <> | Subject | Re: aio-core why not using SuS? [Re: [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io API registration for 2.5.29)] |
| |
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 03:21:33PM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Dan Kegel wrote: > > You can actually consider posix AIO using sigtimedwait() to pick up > > completion notices to fit the definition of completion port if you > > squint a bit. > > ... with the bonus that it fits comfortably into a sigtimedwait() loop > that's waiting for non-AIO things too.
The idea was to make completion events as light weight as possible -- they can be read from the queue without even entering kernel space. Support for getting multiple completion events is also needed (sigtimed wait only pulls one signal at a time). Nothing is stopping us from adding support to do an async sigtimedwait that provides a completion event when a signal arrives.
-ben -- "You will be reincarnated as a toad; and you will be much happier." - 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/
|  |