Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:33:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:33:05 -0500 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:26897 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:32:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 20:32:19 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: Ben LaHaise Cc: Ingo Molnar , "Stephen C. Tweedie" , Linus Torvalds , Alan Cox , Manfred Spraul , Steve Lord , Linux Kernel List , kiobuf-io-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [Kiobuf-io-devel] RFC: Kernel mechanism: Compound event wait Message-ID: <20010206203219.A2975@suse.de> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from bcrl@redhat.com on Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 02:11:23PM -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 06 2001, Ben LaHaise wrote: > > > - make asynchronous io possible in the block layer. This is > > > impossible with the current ll_rw_block scheme and io request > > > plugging. > > > > why is it impossible? > > s/impossible/unpleasant/. ll_rw_blk blocks; it should be possible to have > a non blocking variant that does all of the setup in the caller's context. > Yes, I know that we can do it with a kernel thread, but that isn't as > clean and it significantly penalises small ios (hint: databases issue > *lots* of small random ios and a good chunk of large ios). So make a non-blocking variant, not a big deal. Users of async I/O know how to deal with resource limits anyway. -- Jens Axboe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/