Messages in this thread |  | | From | Zach Brown <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0 of 4] Generic AIO by scheduling stacks | Date | Wed, 31 Jan 2007 09:38:11 -0800 |
| |
>> - We would now have some measure of task_struct concurrency. Read >> that twice, >> it's scary.
> That's the one scaring me in fact ... Maybe it will end up being an > easy > one but I don't feel too comfortable...
Indeed, that was my first reaction too. I dismissed the idea for a good six months after initially realizing that it implied sharing journal_info, etc.
But when I finally sat down and started digging through the task_struct members and, after quickly dismissing involuntary preemption of the fibrils, it didn't seem so bad. I haven't done an exhaustive audit yet (and I won't advocate merging until I have) but I haven't seen any train wrecks.
> we didn't create fibril-like > things for threads, instead, we share PIDs between tasks. I wonder if > the sane approach would be to actually create task structs (or have a > pool of them pre-created sitting there for performances) and add a way > to share the necessary bits so that syscalls can be run on those > spin-offs.
Maybe, if it comes to that. I have some hopes that sharing by default and explicitly marking the bits that we shouldn't share will be good enough.
- 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/
|  |