[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703020921430.1977@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 09:28:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@....com.au>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] Syslets, "Threadlets", generic AIO support, v3
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> do we really want to have per process signalfs, timerfs and so on - each
> simple structure must be bound to a file, which becomes too cost.
I may be old school, but if you ask me, and if you *really* want those
events, yes. Reason? Unix's everything-is-a-file rule, and being able to
use them with *existing* POSIX poll/select. Remember, not every app
requires huge scalability efforts, so working with simpler and familiar
APIs is always welcome.
The *only* thing that was not practical to have as fd, was block requests.
But maybe threadlets/syslets will handle those just fine, and close the gap.
- Davide
-
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