public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Kerrisk <mtk-manpages@gmx.net>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: "Ulrich Drepper" <drepper@redhat.com>,
	geoff@gclare.org.uk, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
	"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
	"Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
	vda.linux@googlemail.com,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Lee Schermerhorn" <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>,
	"David Härdeman" <david@hardeman.nu>
Subject: Re: RFC: A revised timerfd API
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 15:12:41 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <46F514C9.5010208@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709180936480.22956@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>

Davide, Andrew, Linus, et al.

At the start of this thread
(http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/581115 ), I proposed 4
alternatives to Davide's original timerfd API.  Based on the feedback in
that thread (and one or two earlier comments):

Let's dismiss option (a), since it is an unlovely multiplexing interface.

Option (b) seems a viable.  The most notable concern was from Thomas
Gleixner, that we might end up duplicating code from the POSIX timers API
within the timerfd API -- some eventual refactoring might mitigate this
problem.

Option (c) seems overly complex.  In addition, David Härdeman pointed out
that option (c) (and, I realised afterwards, option (d)) require the
userland programmer to maintain a mapping between timerfd file descriptors
and POSIX timer IDs.  Thomas Gleixner proposed an API that: attempts to
avoid that problem; mixes features of options (c) and (d); and probably
helps avoid redundancy of kernel code between the timerfd system and the
POSIX timers system.  I'll flesh out that API now as I understand it:

====> e) Integrate timerfd() with the POSIX timers API in such a way that
the POSIX timers API understands timerfd file descriptors.

Under the POSIX timers API, a new timer is created using:

int timer_create(clockid_t clockid, struct sigevent *evp,
        timer_t *timerid);

When making this call, we would specify evp.sigev_notify to a new flag
value SIGEV_TIMERFD, to inform the system that this timer will deliver
notification via a timerfd file descriptor.

We would then have a timerfd() call that returns a file descriptor
for the newly created 'timerid':

fd = timerfd(timer_t timerid);

(A variant here would be to have timer_create() directly return a file
descriptor when SIGEV_TIMERFD is specified, although this breaks the
traditional semantics that timer_create() only returns 0 on success.)

We could then use the POSIX timers API to operate on the timer
(start it / modify it / fetch timer value):

int timer_settime(timer_t timerid, int flags,
        const struct itimerspec *value,
        struct itimerspec *ovalue);
int timer_gettime(timer_t timerid, struct itimerspec *value);

The difference here is that 'timerid' could be either:

1) the timerid value returned from timer_create(); or

2) the value (fd | POSIX_TIMER_FD), where POSIX_TIMER_FD is a
   flag (perhaps the topmost bit set on) that indicates that
   the rest of the value is a file descriptor.  With this
   information, the kernel can do a lookup to find the
   corresponding timerfd and perform the required operation
   on it.

Advantages:
  1. Userland programs don't need to maintain a mapping between
     timer IDs and file descriptors.
  2. Adds just a single system call.

Disadvantages:
  1. This design stretches the POSIX timers API in strange
     ways.  My option (d) also did this to a lesser extent,
     and that felt slightly uncomfortable.  Option (e)
     makes more uncomfortable still.  As David Härdeman
     pointed out, overloading file descriptors with flags looks
     ugly, and I can't thing of any other syscall that does
     that.  In addition this idea probably breaks POSIX, since
     'timer_t' is only required to be an arithmetic type: it
     need not specifically be an integer type (although it is
     on Linux).

=====

The upshot is that of the 5 alternatives, I favor option (b).  David
Härdeman also expressed a preference for option (b) and it was Davide's
least disliked alternative ;-).

So I'm inclined to implement option (b), unless someone has strong
objections.  Davide, could I persuade you to help?

Cheers,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
maintainer of Linux man pages Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7

Want to help with man page maintenance?  Grab the latest tarball at
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/docs/manpages/
read the HOWTOHELP file and grep the source files for 'FIXME'.

  reply	other threads:[~2007-09-22 13:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-09-18  7:27 RFC: A revised timerfd API Michael Kerrisk
2007-09-18  7:30 ` Michael Kerrisk
2007-09-18  8:05   ` David Härdeman
2007-09-18  9:01     ` Michael Kerrisk
2007-09-18  9:27       ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-18  9:10   ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-18  9:30     ` Michael Kerrisk
2007-09-18  9:42       ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-18 11:08         ` Michael Kerrisk
2007-09-18 11:30           ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-18 13:13             ` David Härdeman
2007-09-22 13:03               ` Michael Kerrisk
2007-09-18 16:51 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-09-22 13:12   ` Michael Kerrisk [this message]
2007-09-22 14:32     ` Bernd Eckenfels
2007-09-22 16:07       ` Michael Kerrisk
2007-09-22 17:05         ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-22 23:37         ` David Härdeman
2007-09-22 17:10     ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-22 21:07     ` Davide Libenzi
2007-09-22 21:26       ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-22 23:21         ` Davide Libenzi
2007-09-23 17:33       ` Michael Kerrisk
2007-09-23 18:33         ` Davide Libenzi
2007-09-23 18:41           ` Davide Libenzi
2007-09-23 19:03             ` Michael Kerrisk

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=46F514C9.5010208@gmx.net \
    --to=mtk-manpages@gmx.net \
    --cc=Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=david@hardeman.nu \
    --cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
    --cc=drepper@redhat.com \
    --cc=geoff@gclare.org.uk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vda.linux@googlemail.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