linux-kernel - Re: [take24 0/6] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <45622228.80803@garzik.org>
Date:	Mon, 20 Nov 2006 16:46:16 -0500
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
CC:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Chase Venters <chase.venters@...entec.com>,
	Johann Borck <johann.borck@...sedata.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Viro <aviro@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [take24 0/6] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.

Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
>> It is exactly how previous ring buffer (in mapped area though) was
>> implemented.
> 
> Not any of those I saw.  The one I looked at always started again at 
> index 0 to fill the ring buffer.  I'll wait for the next implementation.

I like the two-pointer ring buffer approach, one pointer for the 
consumer and one for the producer.


> You don't want to have a channel like this.  The userlevel code doesn't 
> know which threads are waiting in the kernel on the event queue.  And it 

Agreed.


> You are still completely focused on AIO.  We are talking here about a 
> new generic event handling.  It is not tied to AIO.  We will add all 

Agreed.


> As I said, relative timeouts are unable to cope with settimeofday calls 
> or ntp adjustments.  AIO is certainly usable in situations where 
> timeouts are related to wall clock time.

I think we have lived with relative timeouts for so long, it would be 
unusual to change now.  select(2), poll(2), epoll_wait(2) all take 
relative timeouts.

	Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/