From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [PATCH] add support for vectored and async I/O to all simple filesystems Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 11:06:30 +0000 Message-ID: <20051102110630.GB30550@mail.shareable.org> References: <20051101023656.GA23724@lst.de> <20051101192000.GB29542@mail.shareable.org> <20051101205745.GB27231@kvack.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , akpm@osdl.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail.shareable.org ([81.29.64.88]:4254 "EHLO mail.shareable.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932508AbVKBLGj (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2005 06:06:39 -0500 To: Benjamin LaHaise Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051101205745.GB27231@kvack.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 07:20:00PM +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote: > > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Every filesystem using generic_file_read/generic_file_write directly > > > can easily support vectored and async (well at least the API, it's not > > > async quite yet in mainline) I/O. > > > > Does this change mean aio system calls will now succeed, but not > > actually be asynchronous? > > Yes, there doesn't seem to be the will to merge the buffered filesystem aio > patches. So it means that any program that mustn't block, must now have a stupid kernel version check to make sure it avoids even trying aio system calls? I was under the impression that the right thing to do so far was try them, and when EINVAL is returned, use threads instead. -- Jamie