From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LAojb-0005Ha-6P for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 11:49:55 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LAojZ-0005Fh-LT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 11:49:54 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56593 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LAojZ-0005FM-EO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 11:49:53 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:36842) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LAojY-0005fe-LW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 11:49:53 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:49:47 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Replace posix-aio with custom thread pool Message-ID: <20081211164947.GD6809@random.random> References: <493E965E.5050701@us.ibm.com> <20081210164401.GF18814@random.random> <493FFAB6.2000106@codemonkey.ws> <493FFC8E.9080802@redhat.com> <49400F69.8080707@codemonkey.ws> <20081210190810.GG18814@random.random> <20081211131222.GA14908@random.random> <494130B5.2080800@redhat.com> <20081211155335.GE14908@random.random> <49413B9C.3030703@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <49413B9C.3030703@redhat.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gerd Hoffmann Cc: kvm-devel , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 05:11:08PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Yes. But kernel aio requires O_DIRECT, so aio users are affected > nevertheless. Are you sure? It surely wasn't the case... > Havn't tested that. Could be it isn't a big problem, extra code size > for the two modes aside. There shouldn't be any problem. > Kernel side looks easy, attached patch + syscall table windup in all > archs ... So should we depend on this?