lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 2 of 4] Introduce i386 fibril scheduling
    On Fri, 2 Feb 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:

    > in fact an app could also /trigger/ the execution of a syscall in a
    > different context - to create parallelism artificially - without any
    > blocking event. So we could do:
    >
    > cookie1 = sys_async(sys_read, params);
    > cookie2 = sys_async(sys_write, params);
    >
    > [ ... calculation loop ... ]
    >
    > wait_on_async_syscall(cookie1);
    > wait_on_async_syscall(cookie2);
    >
    > or something like that. Without user-space having to create threads
    > itself, etc. So basically, we'd make kernel threads more useful, and
    > we'd make threading safer - by only letting syscalls thread.

    Since I still think that the many-thousands potential async operations
    coming from network sockets are better handled with a classical event
    machanism [1], and since smooth integration of new async syscall into the
    standard POSIX infrastructure is IMO a huge win, I think we need to have a
    "bridge" to allow async completions being detectable through a pollable
    (by the mean of select/poll/epoll whatever) device.
    In that way you can handle async operations with the best mechanism that
    is fit for them, and gather them in a single async scheduler.



    [1] Unless you really want to have thousands of kthreads/fibrils lingering
    on the system.



    - 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: 2007-02-03 00:41    [W:0.020 / U:32.300 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site