[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <p73abzzpo75.fsf@bingen.suse.de>
Date: 31 Jan 2007 09:58:38 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To: Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-aio@...ck.org,
Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4 of 4] Introduce aio system call submission and completion system calls
Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com> writes:
> This finally does something useful with the notion of being able to schedule
> stacks as fibrils under a task_struct. Again, i386-specific and in need of
> proper layering with archs.
>
> sys_asys_submit() is added to let userspace submit asynchronous system calls.
> It specifies the system call number and arguments. A fibril is constructed for
> each call. Each starts with a stack which executes the given system call
> handler and then returns to a function which records the return code of the
> system call handler. sys_asys_await_completion() then lets userspace collect
> these results.
Do you have any numbers how this compares cycle wise to just doing
clone+syscall+exit in user space?
If the difference is not too big might it be easier to fix
clone+syscall to be more efficient than teach all the rest
of the kernel about fibrils?
-Andi
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists