From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751602Ab1H3HDA (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 03:03:00 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:30350 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750842Ab1H3HC7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 03:02:59 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,300,1312182000"; d="scan'208";a="46394659" From: Andi Kleen To: Daniel Ehrenberg Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Approaches to making io_submit not block References: Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 00:02:57 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Daniel Ehrenberg's message of "Mon, 29 Aug 2011 10:33:24 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Daniel Ehrenberg writes: > > Has anything like this been discussed or implemented? There was a lot of discussion and some patches on "retry based AIO" a few years ago. Didn't really go anywhere, but there are still assorted leftovers in the code. Then there was the "syslets" approach, but that is also still born. Probably needs to be revisited from scratch. The network layer is also badly in need of a better aio interface that supports zero copy. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only