Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 15:21:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 15:21:28 -0400 Received: from relay1.pair.com ([209.68.1.20]:35858 "HELO relay.pair.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 15:21:21 -0400 X-pair-Authenticated: 24.126.73.164 Message-ID: <3DAC6ED0.E4379BEF@kegel.com> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 12:38:56 -0700 From: Dan Kegel X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18-3custom i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Davide Libenzi CC: Benjamin LaHaise , Shailabh Nagar , linux-kernel , linux-aio , Andrew Morton , David Miller , Linus Torvalds , Stephen Tweedie Subject: Re: [PATCH] async poll for 2.5 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1772 Lines: 37 Davide Libenzi wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 12:16:39PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > Ben, one of the reasons of the /dev/epoll speed is how it returns events > > > and how it collapses them. A memory mapped array is divided by two and > > > while the user consumes events in one set, the kernel fill the other one. > > > The next wait() will switch the pointers. There is no copy from kernel to > > > user space. Doing : > > > > > > int sys_epoll_wait(int epd, struct pollfd **pevts, int timeout); > > > > > > the only data the kernel has to copy to userspace is the 4(8) bytes for > > > the "pevts" pointer. > > > > Erm, the aio interface has support for the event ringbuffer being accessed > > by userspace (it lives in user memory and the kernel acts as a writer, with > > userspace as a reader), that's one of its advantages -- completion events > > are directly accessible from userspace after being written to by an > > interrupt. Ideally this is to be wrapped in a vsyscall, but we don't have > > support for that yet on x86, although much of the code written for x86-64 > > should be reusable. > > In general I would like to have a "common" interface to retrieve IO > events, but IMHO the two solutions should be benchmarked before adopting > the one or the other. Seems like /dev/epoll uses a double-buffering scheme rather than a ring buffer, and this is not just a trivial difference; it's related to how redundant events are collapsed, right? - Dan - 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/