Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:49:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:48:51 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:30480 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:48:40 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:47:18 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: "David S. Miller" cc: , , , , Subject: Re: aio In-Reply-To: <20011219.185847.77651573.davem@redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, David S. Miller wrote: > > Not precisely my thrust, which is that AIO is not important to any > significant population of Linux users, it is "nook and cranny" in > scope. And that those "nook and cranny" folks who really find it > important can get paid implementation+support of AIO. I disagree - we can probably make the aio by Ben quite important. Done right, it becomes a very natural way of doing event handling, and it could very well be rather useful for many things that use select loops right now. So I actually like the thing as it stands now. What I don't like is how it's been handled, with people inside Oracle etc working with it, but _not_ people on the kernel mailing list. I don't worry about the code nearly as much as I worry about people starting to clique together. Linus - 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/