Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932191AbWC3MQc (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:16:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932190AbWC3MQc (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:16:32 -0500 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:54598 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932191AbWC3MQb (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:16:31 -0500 Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 14:16:39 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Ingo Molnar Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, torvalds@osdl.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] splice support #2 Message-ID: <20060330121638.GA13476@suse.de> References: <20060330100630.GT13476@suse.de> <20060330120055.GA10402@elte.hu> <20060330120512.GX13476@suse.de> <20060330121030.GA14621@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060330121030.GA14621@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2110 Lines: 49 On Thu, Mar 30 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Jens Axboe wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 30 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > * Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > This patch should resolve all issues mentioned so far. I'd still like > > > > to implement the page moving, but that should just be a separate > > > > patch. > > > > > > neat stuff. One question: why do we require fdin or fdout to be a pipe? > > > Is there any fundamental problem with implementing what Larry's original > > > paper described too: straight pagecache -> socket transfers? Without a > > > pipe intermediary forced inbetween. It only adds unnecessary overhead. > > > > No, not a fundamental problem. I think I even hid that in some comment > > in there, at least if it's decipharable by someone else than myself... > > Basically I think it would be nice in the future to tidy this a little > > bit and separate the actual container from the pipe itself - and have > > the pipe just fill/use the same container. > > why is there a container needed at all? If i splice pagecache->socket, > we can use sendpage to send it off immediately. There is no need for any > container - both the pagecache and sendpage use struct page, and when we > iterate to create a container we might as well ->sendpage() those pages > off immediately instead. > > I agree with the purpose of making sys_splice() generic and in > particular usable in scripts/shells where pipes are commonly used, but > we should also fulfill the original promise (outlined 15 years ago or > so) and not limit this to pipes. That way i could improve TUX to make > use of it for example ;) There's absolutely no reason why we can't add fd -> fd splicing as well, so no worries. Right now we just require a pipe transport. It's extendable :-) -- Jens Axboe - 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/