Messages in this thread | | | From | Zach Brown <> | Subject | Re: [patch 00/13] Syslets, "Threadlets", generic AIO support, v3 | Date | Thu, 22 Feb 2007 13:30:39 -0800 |
| |
> The more I think about it, a reasonable solution might actually be to > use threadlets for disk I/O and pure event based processing for > networking. It is two different handling paths and non-unified, > but that might be the price for good performance :-)
I generally agree, with some comments.
If we come to the decision that there are some message rates that are better suited to delivery into a user-read ring (10gige rx to kevent, say) then it doesn't seem like it would be much of a stretch to add a facility where syslet completion could be funneled into that channel as well.
I also wonder if there isn't some opportunity to cut down the number of syscalls / op in networking land. Is it madness to think of a call like recvmsgv() which could provide a vector of msghdrs? It might not make sense, but it might cut down on the per-op overhead for loads that know they're going to be heavy enough to get a decent amount of batching without fatally harming latency. Maybe those loads are rare..
- z - 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/
| |