From: Davi Arnaut <davi@haxent.com.br>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 14/22] pollfs: pollable futex
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 14:37:49 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4638CC6D.6080505@haxent.com.br> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a36005b50705021010l5c7badc6ub61228f14fdbb28a@mail.gmail.com>
Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> On 5/2/07, Davi Arnaut <davi@haxent.com.br> wrote:
>> thread A:
>> int fd = plfutex(addr, 0);
>> do
>> poll(fdset+fd);
>> process network events
>> queue obj to thread B
>> if fd:
>> job processed
>>
>> thread B:
>> wait_job();
>> process_job();
>> raise_event(addr);
>
> This is not the model you can implement with your changes. Because
> every single waiter is woken you need one thread listening for the
> jobs and then distribute the work. Otherwise you have thundering
> herds of threads and only one gets to do some work.
>
NO! Every single waiter of the _file descriptor_ is waked, not of the futex.
One can associate N fds with a single futex address. FUTEX_WAKE with
nproc = 1 will only wake one of the file descriptors. Its up to the user
to decide if he wants a broadcast or not.
Have you seen the email where I told you exactly this?
>> It simple as is, there is no need to overdesign.
>
> There is no reason to go with a limited, too-simple minded design if
> we've already identified a much better design. The fact that poll is
> used today does not excuse piling on more and more code which makes
> additional functions which don't fit into the poll framework barely
> work. Plus, poll/epoll itself is a problem.
>
epoll itself is a problem?! sorry, but i didn't know that. Care to
elaborate?
I really need some guidance here. I just want to unify the epoll for various
event sources. It seems a lot of people like this, just look at the
popularity
of libevent and other "unifying" event loops.
I don't think we need another epoll clone.
> And you cannot talk about little changes and no "overdesign". You
> have 22 patches for all this. It's not just limited to futexes, it's
> the whole thing which IMO is unnecessary ballast going forward.
davi@karmic:~/git/linux-2.6$ find patches/ -name *.patch |grep -v
syscall | wc -l
10
davi@karmic:~/git/linux-2.6$ find patches/ -name *.patch |grep -v
syscall |grep futex
patches/pollfs-futex-async-wait.patch
patches/pollfs-futex.patch
--
Davi Arnaut
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-02 17:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-02 5:22 [patch 00/22] pollfs: filesystem abstraction for pollable objects Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 01/22] pollfs: kernel-side API header Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 02/22] pollfs: file system operations Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 03/22] pollfs: asynchronously wait for a signal Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 04/22] pollfs: pollable signal Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 05/22] pollfs: pollable signal compat code Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 06/22] pollfs: export the plsignal system call Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 07/22] pollfs: x86, wire up " Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 08/22] pollfs: x86_64, " Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 09/22] pollfs: pollable hrtimers Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 21:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-05-02 23:00 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 10/22] pollfs: export the pltimer system call Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 11/22] pollfs: x86, wire up " Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 12/22] pollfs: x86_64, " Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 13/22] pollfs: asynchronous futex wait Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 14/22] pollfs: pollable futex Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-02 6:16 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 6:39 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-02 6:54 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 7:11 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 7:40 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-02 7:55 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-02 8:08 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-02 8:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-02 16:39 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-02 16:59 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 17:10 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-02 17:29 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-02 17:53 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-02 18:21 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-03 13:46 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-03 18:24 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-03 19:03 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-03 22:14 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-04 15:28 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-04 19:15 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-04 19:20 ` 2.6.20.4 / 2.6.21.1 AT91SAM9260-EK oops Ryan Ordway
2007-05-04 23:38 ` [patch 14/22] pollfs: pollable futex Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-05 18:54 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-06 7:50 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-06 19:47 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-06 19:54 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-06 20:18 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-06 21:57 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-07 5:33 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-07 5:46 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-02 17:37 ` Davi Arnaut [this message]
2007-05-02 17:49 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-02 18:05 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-03 13:40 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-02 12:20 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 12:39 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 16:46 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-02 17:05 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 15/22] pollfs: export the plfutex system call Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 16/22] pollfs: x86, wire up " Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 17/22] pollfs: x86_64, " Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 18/22] pollfs: check if a AIO event ring is empty Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 19/22] pollfs: pollable aio Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 20/22] pollfs: export the plaio system call Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 21/22] pollfs: x86, wire up " Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 5:22 ` [patch 22/22] pollfs: x86_64, " Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 6:05 ` [patch 00/22] pollfs: filesystem abstraction for pollable objects Andrew Morton
2007-05-02 17:28 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-02 17:47 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 18:23 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-02 18:50 ` Davi Arnaut
2007-05-02 19:42 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-05-02 20:11 ` Davi Arnaut
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=4638CC6D.6080505@haxent.com.br \
--to=davi@haxent.com.br \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=drepper@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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