[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <C07594B5-5FD4-44A9-B60B-9D8B0906154C@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 09:59:39 -0800
From: Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-aio@...ck.org, Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 4] Generic AIO by scheduling stacks
> Btw, this is also something where we should just disallow certain
> system
> calls from being done through the asynchronous method.
Yeah. Maybe just a bitmap built from __NR_ constants? I don't know
if we can do it in a way that doesn't require arch maintainer's
attention.
It seems like it would be nice to avoid putting a test in the
handlers themselves, and leave it up to the aio syscall submission
processing.
> More interesting is the question about "close()", though. Currently we
> have an optimization (fget/fput_light) that basically boils down to
> "we
> know we are the only owners". That optimization becomes more
> "interesting"
> with AIO - we need to disable it when fibrils are active (because
> other
> fibrils or the main thread can do it), but we can still keep it for
> the
> non-fibril case.
I'll take a look, thanks for pointing it out.
- z
-
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