Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:29:04 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch 00/13] Syslets, "Threadlets", generic AIO support, v3 |
| |
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> > The pushback to the primary thread you speak of is just extra work > > in my mind, for networking. Better to just begin operations and sit > > in the primary thread(s) waiting for events, and when they arrive > > push the operations further along using non-blocking writes, reads, > > and accept() calls. There is no blocking context really needed for > > these kinds of things, so a mechanism that tries to provide one is a > > waste. > > one question is, what is cheaper, to block out of a read and a write and ^-------to back out > to set up the event notification and then to return to the user > context, or to just stay right in there with all the context already > constructed and on the stack, and schedule away and then come back and > queue back to the primary thread once the condition the thread is > waiting for is done? The latter isnt all that unattractive in my mind, > because it always does forward progress, with minimal 'backout' costs.
Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |