Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 16 Aug 2002 15:09:46 +0530 | From | Suparna Bhattacharya <> | 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 Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 09:42:25PM -0400, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > > Now reading the SuS specifications I also like less and less our current > > kernel API of this sumbit_io, the SuS does exactly what I suggested > > originally that is aio_read/aio_write/aio_fsync as separate calls. So > > the merging effect mentioned by Ben cannot be taken advantage of by the > > kernel anyways because userspace will issue separate calls for each > > command. > > Read it again. You've totally missed lio_listio. Also keep in mind what >
Also, wasn't the fact that the API was designed to support both POSIX and completion port style semantics, another reason for a different (lightweight) in-kernel api? The c10k users of aio are likely to find the latter model (i.e. completion ports) more efficient.
Regards Suparna - 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/
|  |