Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750759AbXBMPqI (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:46:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750760AbXBMPqI (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:46:08 -0500 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.188]:6247 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750759AbXBMPqF (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:46:05 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=W0C6Z1yATrb2sHRGbf187dytDZ5GdNRYt7sgVs2krkFH4WdG2XdVI6dcGe0llgpybtgEUq90BI4x7XtJIXOIebHPcGVM/1+5tzlL2PtnFzDbKbnzokqbbWbpyCqie1eGbOSkD9t3chy66EZAq8uPIbRdlKs+DgI5STy6Z7gIbwk= Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:46:03 -0500 From: "Dmitry Torokhov" To: Alan Subject: Re: [patch 00/11] ANNOUNCE: "Syslets", generic asynchronous system call support Cc: "Ingo Molnar" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Linus Torvalds" , "Arjan van de Ven" , "Christoph Hellwig" , "Andrew Morton" , "Ulrich Drepper" , "Zach Brown" , "Evgeniy Polyakov" , "David S. Miller" , "Benjamin LaHaise" , "Suparna Bhattacharya" , "Davide Libenzi" , "Thomas Gleixner" In-Reply-To: <20070213150019.4b4d4827@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060529212109.GA2058@elte.hu> <20070213142010.GA638@elte.hu> <20070213150019.4b4d4827@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1661 Lines: 45 On 2/13/07, Alan wrote: > > A syslet is executed opportunistically: i.e. the syslet subsystem > > assumes that the syslet will not block, and it will switch to a > > cachemiss kernel thread from the scheduler. This means that even a > > How is scheduler fairness maintained ? and what is done for resource > accounting here ? > > > that the kernel fills and user-space clears. Waiting is done via the > > sys_async_wait() system call. Completion can be supressed on a per-atom > > They should be selectable as well iff possible. > > > Open issues: > > Let me add some more > > sys_setuid/gid/etc need to be synchronous only and not occur > while other async syscalls are running in parallel to meet current kernel > assumptions. > > sys_exec and other security boundaries must be synchronous only > and not allow async "spill over" (consider setuid async binary patching) > > > - sys_fork() and sys_async_exec() should be filtered out from the > > syscalls that are allowed - first one only makes sense with ptregs, > > clone and vfork. async_vfork is a real mindbender actually. > > > second one is a nice kernel recursion thing :) I didnt want to > > duplicate the sys_call_table though - maybe others have a better > > idea. > > What are the semantics of async sys_async_wait and async sys_async ? > Ooooohh. OpenVMS lives forever ;) Me likeee ;) -- Dmitry - 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/