linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/13] aio: add support for async openat()

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: <20160112095319.GA20597@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:53:19 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>, linux-aio@...ck.org,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/13] aio: add support for async openat()


* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> What do you think? Do you think it might be possible to aim for a generic "do 
> system call asynchronously" model instead?
> 
> I'm adding Ingo the to cc, because I think Ingo had a "run this list of system 
> calls" patch at one point - in order to avoid system call overhead. I don't 
> think that was very interesting (because system call overhead is seldom all that 
> noticeable for any interesting system calls), but with the "let's do the list 
> asynchronously" addition it might be much more intriguing. Ingo, do I remember 
> correctly that it was you? I might be confused about who wrote that patch, and I 
> can't find it now.

Yeah, it was the whole 'syslets' and 'threadlets' stuff - I had both implemented 
and prototyped into a 'list directory entries asynchronously' testcase.

Threadlets was pretty close to what you are suggesting now. Here's a very good (as 
usual!) writeup from LWN:

  https://lwn.net/Articles/223899/

Thanks,

	Ingo