From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: [RFC] Add support for semaphore-like structure with support for asynchronous I/O Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:02:34 -0500 Message-ID: <1112227354.10672.4.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> References: <1112219491.10771.18.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20050330143409.04f48431.akpm@osdl.org> <1112224663.18019.39.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20050330154444.02da9765.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Filesystem Development Return-path: Received: from pat.uio.no ([129.240.130.16]:20928 "EHLO pat.uio.no") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262603AbVCaACp (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:02:45 -0500 To: Andrew Morton In-Reply-To: <20050330154444.02da9765.akpm@osdl.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org on den 30.03.2005 Klokka 15:44 (-0800) skreiv Andrew Morton: > Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > > This is required in order to allow threads such as rpciod or keventd > > itself (for which sleeping may cause deadlocks) to ask the iosem manager > > code to simply queue the work that need to run once the iosem has been > > granted. That work function is then, of course, responsible for > > releasing the iosem when it is done. > > I see. I think. Should we be using those aio/N threads for this? They > don't seem to do much else... That would be quite OK by me if nobody objects. Cheers, Trond -- Trond Myklebust