From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Mason Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/13] aio: add support for async openat() Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:45:09 -0500 Message-ID: <20160112014509.z6xefgc2rrkytmvk@ret.masoncoding.com> References: <150a0b4905f1d7274b4c2c7f5e3f4d8df5dda1d7.1452549431.git.bcrl@kvack.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Benjamin LaHaise , Ingo Molnar , linux-aio@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux API , linux-mm , Alexander Viro , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 04:22:28PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > > Another blocking operation used by applications that want aio > > functionality is that of opening files that are not resident in memory. > > Using the thread based aio helper, add support for IOCB_CMD_OPENAT. > > So I think this is ridiculously ugly. > > AIO is a horrible ad-hoc design, with the main excuse being "other, > less gifted people, made that design, and we are implementing it for > compatibility because database people - who seldom have any shred of > taste - actually use it". > > But AIO was always really really ugly. > > Now you introduce the notion of doing almost arbitrary system calls > asynchronously in threads, but then you use that ass-backwards nasty > interface to do so. [ ... ] > I'm adding Ingo the to cc, because I think Ingo had a "run this list > of system calls" patch at one point - in order to avoid system call > overhead. I don't think that was very interesting (because system call > overhead is seldom all that noticeable for any interesting system > calls), but with the "let's do the list asynchronously" addition it > might be much more intriguing. Ingo, do I remember correctly that it > was you? I might be confused about who wrote that patch, and I can't > find it now. Zach Brown and Ingo traded a bunch of ideas. There were chicklets and syslets? A little search, it looks like acall was a slightly different iteration, but the patches didn't make it off oss.oracle.com: https://lwn.net/Articles/316806/ -chris -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org