Re: [Kiobuf-io-devel] Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1

Re: [Kiobuf-io-devel] Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 08:05:41AM +0530, bsuparna@in.ibm.com wrote:
> Shouldn't we have an error / status field too ?

Might make sense.

	Christoph

-- 
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [Kiobuf-io-devel] Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1

[bsuparna]

>Ok. Then we need an additional more or less generic object that is used
for
>passing in a rw_kiovec file operation (and we really want that for many
kinds
>of IO). I thould mostly be used for communicating to the high-level
driver.
>
>/*
> * the name is just plain stupid, but that shouldn't matter
> */
>struct vfs_kiovec {
>    struct kiovec *     iov;
>
>    /* private data, mostly for the callback */
>    void * private;
>
>    /* completion callback */
>    void (*end_io) (struct vfs_kiovec *);
>    wait_queue_head_t wait_queue;
>};
>
>    Christoph

Shouldn't we have an error / status field too ?


  Suparna Bhattacharya
  Systems Software Group, IBM Global Services, India
  E-mail : bsuparna@in.ibm.com
  Phone : 91-80-5267117, Extn : 2525


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/