[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18235.26873.437786.651828@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 08:30:33 +1100
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, hch@...radead.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, gregkh@...e.de, mucci@...utk.edu,
eranian@....hp.com, wcohen@...hat.com, robert.richter@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, andi@...stfloor.org
Subject: Re: [perfmon] Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 merge news
Nick Piggin writes:
> What I really mean is a readv-like syscall, but one that also
> vectorises the file offset. Maybe this is useful enough as a generic
> syscall that also helps Paul's example...
I've sometimes thought it would be useful to have a "transaction"
system call that is like a write + read combined into one:
int transaction(int fd, char *req, size_t req_nb,
char *reply, size_t reply_nb);
as a way to provide a general request/reply interface for special
files.
> Of course, I guess this all depends on whether the atomicity is an
> important requirement. If not, you can obviously just do it with
> multiple read syscalls...
That would take N system calls instead of one, which could have a
performance impact if you need to read the counters frequently (which
I believe you do in some performance monitoring situations).
Paul.
-
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