Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750838AbWHBACh (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Aug 2006 20:02:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750836AbWHBABy (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Aug 2006 20:01:54 -0400 Received: from dsl027-180-168.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([216.27.180.168]:18361 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750786AbWHBABo (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Aug 2006 20:01:44 -0400 Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 17:01:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20060801.170138.107248641.davem@davemloft.net> To: zach.brown@oracle.com Cc: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drepper@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [take2 1/4] kevent: core files. From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <44CFEA4B.3060200@oracle.com> References: <11544248451203@2ka.mipt.ru> <44CFEA4B.3060200@oracle.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 4.2 on Emacs 21.4 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 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: 1525 Lines: 38 From: Zach Brown Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 16:56:59 -0700 > Even if we only have one syscall with a cmd multiplexer (which I'm not > thrilled with), we should at least make these arguments explicit in the > system call. It's weird to hide them in a struct. We could also think > about making them u32 or u64 so that we don't need compat wrappers, but > maybe that's overkill. I think making the userspace data structure not require any compat handling is a must, thanks for pointing this out Zach. > It'd be great if these struct members could get a prefix (ala: inode -> > i_, socket -> sk_) so that it's less painful getting tags helpers to > look up instances for us. Asking for 'lock' is hilarious. Agreed. > Hmm. I think the current preference is not to have a lock per bucket. Yes, it loses badly, that's why we undid this in the routing cache and just have a fixed sized array of locks which is hashed into. For kevents, I think a single spinlock initially is fine and if we hit performance problems on SMP we can fix it. We should not implement complexity we have no proof of needing yet :) > > +#define KEVENT_MAX_REQUESTS PAGE_SIZE/sizeof(struct kevent) > > This is unused? It is probably groundwork for the mmap() ring buffer... :) - 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/