lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> * H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>
> > It seems that you're doing the same thing in both cases, except you're
> > now extending it to include other random functionality, which means
> > other things than syslets are suddenly affected.
> >
> > syslets are arguably a little bit different, since what you're
> > effectively doing there is running a miniature interpreted language in
> > kernel space. A higher startup overhead should be acceptable, since
> > you're amortizing it over a larger number of calls. Extending that
> > mechanism suddenly means you HAVE to use that interpreted language
> > message mechanism to access certain system calls, which really does
> > not seem like a good thing neither for performance nor for encouraging
> > sane design of interfaces.
>
> whether that interpreted syslet language survives is still an open
> question - it was extremely ugly when i wrote the first version of it
> and it only got uglier since then :-)

Aha! You admitted it finally :)



- Davide


-
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: 2007-11-20 23:37    [W:0.166 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site