From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gabor Gombas Subject: Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single project Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 14:27:10 +0100 Message-ID: <20100321132709.GA7962@twister.home> References: <4BA00F1F.1090907@codemonkey.ws> <20100317081041.GC16374@elte.hu> <4BA1E24B.6090904@redhat.com> <20100318085607.GB2157@elte.hu> <4BA1FC80.2000401@redhat.com> <20100318105013.GB24464@elte.hu> <4BA20EB8.60707@redhat.com> <20100318114821.GB13168@elte.hu> <4BA23E61.4080003@codemonkey.ws> <20100318161310.GA447@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Anthony Liguori , Avi Kivity , "Zhang, Yanmin" , Peter Zijlstra , Sheng Yang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marcelo Tosatti , oerg Roedel , Jes Sorensen , Gleb Natapov , Zachary Amsden , ziteng.huang@intel.com, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Fr?d?ric Weisbecker To: Ingo Molnar Return-path: Received: from relay02.digicable.hu ([92.249.128.188]:46130 "EHLO relay02.digicable.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751900Ab0CUN1P (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Mar 2010 09:27:15 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100318161310.GA447@elte.hu> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 05:13:10PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Why does Linux AIO still suck? Why do we not have a proper interface in > > userspace for doing asynchronous file system operations? > > Good that you mention it, i think it's an excellent example. > > The suckage of kernel async IO is for similar reasons: there's an ugly package > separation problem between the kernel and between glibc - and between the apps > that would make use of it. No, kernel async IO sucks because it still does not play well with buffered I/O. Last time I checked (about a year ago or so), AIO syscall latencies were much worse when buffered I/O was used compared to direct I/O. Unfortunately, to achieve good performance with direct I/O, you need a HW RAID card with lots of on-board cache. Gabor