lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0 of 4] Generic AIO by scheduling stacks
Date
> I looked at this approach a long time ago, and basically gave up  
> because
> it looked like too much work.

Indeed, your mention of it in that thread.. a year ago?.. is what got
this notion sitting in the back of my head. I didn't like it at
first, but it grew on me.

> I heartily approve, although I only gave the actual patches a very
> cursory
> glance. I think the approach is the proper one, but the devil is in
> the
> details. It might be that the stack allocation overhead or some other
> subtle fundamental problem ends up making this impractical in the
> end, but
> I would _really_ like for this to basically go in.

As for efficiency and overhead, I hope to get some time with the team
that work on the Giant Database Software Whose Name We Shall Not
Speak. That'll give us some non-trival loads to profile.

> It won't matter at all for a certain class of calls (a lot of the
> people
> who want to do AIO really end up doing non-interruptible things, and
> signalling is a non-issue), but not only is it going to matter for
> some
> others, we will almost certainly want to have a way to not just
> signal a
> task, but a single "fibril" (and let me say that I'm not convinced
> about
> your naming, but I don't hate it either ;)

Yeah, no doubt. I'm wildly open to discussion here. (and yeah, me
either, but I don't care much about the name. I got tired of
qualifying overloaded uses of 'stack' or 'thread', that's all :)).

> But from a quick overview of the patches, I really don't see anything
> fundamentally wrong. It needs some error checking and some limiting (I
> _really_ don't think we want a regular user starting a thousand
> fibrils
> concurrently), but it actually looks much less invasive than I
> thought it
> would be.

I think we'll also want to flesh out the submission and completion
interface so that we don't find ourselves frustrated with it in
another 5 years. What's there now is just scaffolding to support the
interesting kernel-internal part. No doubt the kevent thread will
come into play here.

- z
-
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: 2007-01-30 23:51    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans