From: Scot McKinley <scot.mckinley@oracle.com>
To: John Myers <jgmyers@netscape.com>
Cc: Joel Becker <jlbec@evilplan.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-aio@kvack.org" <linux-aio@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.5.71-mm1] aio process hang on EINVAL
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:42:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EF23C70.5010901@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3EF22301.1000003@netscape.com
> io_submit() is incapable of returning operation success notifications.
Exactly, that's why i proposed a new submission interface. ie, to
allow io_submit() to support the "always return async, even IF the
operation has ALREADY completed" paradigm, and another interface
to support the "return synchronous completions on submission"
paradigm.
> "MAY" is far cry from "MUST". I object strongly to requiring all
> callers to io_submit() to be able to handle immediate completions. In
> my aio framework, the caller of io_submit() is not in a context where it
> can invoke completion callbacks, since completion callbacks are not
> required to be reentrant.
Fine (see interfaces defined above).
> For the specific conditions under discussion, it was. The conditions
> were certainly extremely rare.
Yes, and we've moved past that, since there are other conditions which
are not as rare.
> The traditional way of dealing with this is to first call the
> synchronous nonblocking interface, retrying with the asynchronous
> interface only when the nonblocking one indicates no progress.
Great...i am glad that we atleast agree that the interface is necessary,
tho maybe not on its makeup.
The issue i brought up (bcopy threshold), is not a non-blocking issue,
and the above is not the "traditional", nor the correct way of dealing w/
it. The app should NOT need to make multiple sys-calls to initiate
the io. By far the majority of the existly network aio api's simply
return an indication of the immediate/synchronous completion as a
return indication from a *single* submission routine. There is no
reason why we cannot, also.
Regards, -sm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-19 22:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-17 0:43 [PATCH 2.5.71-mm1] aio process hang on EINVAL Daniel McNeil
2003-06-17 1:33 ` John Myers
2003-06-17 3:24 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2003-06-17 18:31 ` John Myers
2003-06-17 21:06 ` Daniel McNeil
2003-06-18 0:03 ` John Myers
2003-06-18 0:15 ` Joel Becker
2003-06-18 0:25 ` John Myers
2003-06-18 0:42 ` Joel Becker
2003-06-19 0:33 ` John Myers
2003-06-19 0:41 ` Joel Becker
2003-06-19 0:58 ` John Myers
2003-06-19 1:48 ` Scot McKinley
2003-06-19 20:54 ` John Myers
2003-06-19 22:42 ` Scot McKinley [this message]
2003-06-18 5:11 ` Scot McKinley
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=3EF23C70.5010901@oracle.com \
--to=scot.mckinley@oracle.com \
--cc=jgmyers@netscape.com \
--cc=jlbec@evilplan.org \
--cc=linux-aio@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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