From: Dan Kegel <dank@kegel.com>
To: suparna@in.ibm.com
Cc: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@redhat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@elf.ucw.cz>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aio@kvack.org
Subject: Re: aio-core why not using SuS? [Re: [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io API registration for 2.5.29)]
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 06:43:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D5D0186.7B7724BC@kegel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20020816150945.A1832@in.ibm.com
Suparna Bhattacharya wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 09:42:25PM -0400, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> > > Now reading the SuS specifications I also like less and less our current
> > > kernel API of this sumbit_io, the SuS does exactly what I suggested
> > > originally that is aio_read/aio_write/aio_fsync as separate calls. So
> > > the merging effect mentioned by Ben cannot be taken advantage of by the
> > > kernel anyways because userspace will issue separate calls for each
> > > command.
> >
> > Read it again. You've totally missed lio_listio. Also keep in mind what
> >
>
> Also, wasn't the fact that the API was designed to support both POSIX
> and completion port style semantics, another reason for a different
> (lightweight) in-kernel api? The c10k users of aio are likely to find
> the latter model (i.e. completion ports) more efficient.
You can actually consider posix AIO using sigtimedwait() to pick up completion
notices to fit the definition of completion port if you squint a bit.
(The patented scheduler magic of NT completion ports is just a fun extra...)
- Dan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-08-16 13:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 83+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-07-30 5:41 async-io API registration for 2.5.29 Andrea Arcangeli
2002-07-30 8:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-07-30 13:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-07-30 13:52 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-07-30 16:43 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-07-30 16:59 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-07-30 19:10 ` Jeff Dike
2002-07-30 18:09 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-07-30 18:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-07-30 18:31 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-07-30 20:57 ` Jeff Dike
2002-07-30 20:47 ` Jeff Dike
2002-07-30 21:26 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-07-30 10:50 ` Rik van Riel
2002-07-30 12:49 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-07-30 13:29 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2002-07-30 21:41 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-07-30 21:54 ` [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io API registration for 2.5.29) Benjamin LaHaise
2002-07-31 0:44 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-07-31 14:46 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-07-31 16:31 ` Charles 'Buck' Krasic
2002-08-01 10:30 ` Pavel Machek
2002-08-01 14:47 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-08-01 15:00 ` Chris Friesen
2002-08-01 16:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-08-01 17:30 ` Alan Cox
2002-08-01 16:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-08-01 16:41 ` [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io API registration for2.5.29) Chris Friesen
2002-08-01 18:01 ` [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io API registration for 2.5.29) Benjamin LaHaise
2002-08-15 23:54 ` aio-core why not using SuS? [Re: [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io API registration for 2.5.29)] Andrea Arcangeli
2002-08-16 1:42 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-08-16 1:57 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-08-16 2:00 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-08-16 2:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-08-16 2:16 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-08-16 2:40 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-08-16 3:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-08-16 3:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-08-16 4:47 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-08-17 3:46 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-08-17 4:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-08-17 4:15 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-08-17 4:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-11-02 5:12 ` Pavel Machek
2002-08-17 5:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-08-17 5:24 ` lots of mem on 32 bit machines (was: aio-core why not using SuS?) Martin J. Bligh
2002-08-17 5:12 ` aio-core why not using SuS? [Re: [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io API registration for 2.5.29)] Martin J. Bligh
2002-08-17 17:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-08-17 21:27 ` 32 bit arch with lots of RAM Martin J. Bligh
2002-08-22 16:30 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-08-22 16:36 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-08-22 16:15 ` aio-core why not using SuS? [Re: [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io API registration for 2.5.29)] Andrea Arcangeli
2002-08-22 16:12 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-08-20 0:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-08-17 4:36 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-08-16 2:32 ` Rik van Riel
2002-08-16 2:32 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-08-16 9:39 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2002-08-16 10:03 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-08-16 11:23 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2002-08-16 11:28 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2002-08-16 13:49 ` Dan Kegel
2002-09-02 18:40 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-09-03 12:04 ` aio-core in 2.5 - io_queue_wait and io_getevents Suparna Bhattacharya
2002-09-05 5:21 ` aio-core why not using SuS? [Re: [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io API registration for 2.5.29)] Benjamin LaHaise
2002-08-16 13:43 ` Dan Kegel [this message]
2002-08-16 14:21 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-08-16 14:42 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-08-16 15:40 ` John Gardiner Myers
2002-08-23 16:11 ` aio-core why not using SuS? [Re: [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re:async-io " Dan Kegel
2002-08-16 1:53 ` aio-core why not using SuS? [Re: [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io " Dan Kegel
2002-08-01 19:18 ` [rfc] aio-core for 2.5.29 (Re: async-io API registration for 2.5.29) Chris Wedgwood
2002-08-01 19:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-08-01 19:31 ` Chris Wedgwood
2002-08-02 8:24 ` Pavel Machek
2002-08-02 11:59 ` Alan Cox
2002-08-02 15:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-07-31 1:20 ` async-io API registration for 2.5.29 Rik van Riel
2002-07-31 1:32 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-07-31 8:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-07-31 13:19 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-07-30 13:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-07-30 16:49 ` Andrea Arcangeli
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3D5D0186.7B7724BC@kegel.com \
--to=dank@kegel.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=bcrl@redhat.com \
--cc=cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com \
--cc=linux-aio@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@elf.ucw.cz \
--cc=suparna@in.ibm.com \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox