From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261672AbVFPMxc (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2005 08:53:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261673AbVFPMxc (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2005 08:53:32 -0400 Received: from e5.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.145]:54965 "EHLO e5.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261672AbVFPMxZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2005 08:53:25 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 18:32:39 +0530 From: Suparna Bhattacharya To: Benjamin LaHaise Cc: linux-aio@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] aio_down() for i386 and x86_64 Message-ID: <20050616130239.GA4839@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: suparna@in.ibm.com References: <20050614215022.GC21286@kvack.org> <20050615165349.GA4521@in.ibm.com> <20050615191830.GA28261@kvack.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050615191830.GA28261@kvack.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 03:18:30PM -0400, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 10:23:49PM +0530, Suparna Bhattacharya wrote: > > Interesting approach - using ki_wait.private for this. > > Could we make aio_down take a wait queue parameter as well instead of > > the iocb ? > > Hmmm, I guess there might be instances where someone has to wait on > multiple wait queues. Will add that to the next version of the patch. > > > Need to think a little about impact on io cancellation. > > It should be possible to cancel semaphore operations fairly easily -- > the aio_down function can set ->ki_cancel to point to a semaphore cancel > routine. I'll give coding that a try. > > > BTW, is the duplication of functions across architectures still needed ? I > > thought that one of advantages of implementing a separate aio_down > > routine vs modifiying down to become retryable was to get away from > > that ... or wasn't it ? > > Good point. The fast path for down() will probably need to remain a > separate function, but we could well unify the code with the > down_interruptible() codepath. > > > Meanwhile, I probably need to repost my aio_wait_bit patches - there > > may be some impact here. > > Sure -- any version of those would be useful to build on. Cheers! http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/suparna/aio/2610-rc2/ has the patchset. I just updated the AIO wait bit ones to 2.6.12-rc6, will post them in a separate thread. Regards Suparna > > -ben > -- > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-aio' in > the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux AIO, > see: http://www.kvack.org/aio/ > Don't email: aart@kvack.org -- Suparna Bhattacharya (suparna@in.ibm.com) Linux Technology Center IBM Software Lab, India