Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:46:25 +0100 | From | Eric Dumazet <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2 of 4] Introduce i386 fibril scheduling |
| |
David Miller a écrit : > From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> > Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 13:28:34 -0800 (PST) > >> Yeah, in 1% of all cases it will block, and you'll want to wait for them. >> Maybe the kevent queue works then, but if it needs any more setup than the >> nonblocking case, that's a big no. > > So the idea is to just run it to completion if it won't block and use > a fibril if it would? > > kevent could support something like that too.
It seems to me that kevent was designed to handle many events sources on a single endpoint, like epoll (but with different internals). Typical load of thousand of sockets/pipes providers glued into one queue.
In the fibril case, I guess a thread wont have many fibrils lying around...
Also, kevent needs a fd lookup/fput to retrieve some queued events, and that may be a performance hit for the AIO case, (fget/fput in a multi-threaded program cost some atomic ops)
- 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/
| |