netdev - Re: [take32 0/10] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.

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]

Date:	Wed, 10 Jan 2007 06:11:26 -0500
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Chase Venters <chase.venters@...entec.com>,
	Johann Borck <johann.borck@...sedata.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@...erus.ca>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [take32 0/10] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.

Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> Generic event handling mechanism.
> 
> Kevent is a generic subsytem which allows to handle event notifications.
> It supports both level and edge triggered events. It is similar to
> poll/epoll in some cases, but it is more scalable, it is faster and
> allows to work with essentially eny kind of events.
> 
> Events are provided into kernel through control syscall and can be read
> back through ring buffer or using usual syscalls.
> Kevent update (i.e. readiness switching) happens directly from internals
> of the appropriate state machine of the underlying subsytem (like
> network, filesystem, timer or any other).
> 
> Homepage:
> http://tservice.net.ru/~s0mbre/old/?section=projects&item=kevent
> 
> Documentation page:
> http://linux-net.osdl.org/index.php/Kevent
> 
> Consider for inclusion.
> 
> With this release I start 3 days resending timeout - i.e. each third day 
> I will send either new version (if something new was requested and agreed 
> to be implemented) or resending with back counter started from three. When 
> back counter hits zero after three resendings I consider there is no interest 
> in subsystem and I will stop further sending. 
> 
> I really doubt it is a good way to tell the world about my work, and I bet you 
> all tired from those pathos words, but I really would like to get some feedback,
> since I want to start to work on network AIO, but sending mails into 
> unfeedbackable 'destination' really does not motivate me for that.
> 
> Thanks for understanding and your time.

Once the rate of change slows, Andrew should IMO definitely pick this up.

If you wanted to make this process automatic, create a git branch that 
Andrew and others can pull.

I like the direction so far, and think it should be in -mm for wider 
testing and review.

	Jeff



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html