Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:25:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:25:03 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:48657 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:24:51 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:23:27 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: "David S. Miller" cc: , , , , Subject: Re: aio In-Reply-To: <20011219.221245.02301926.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: > > Ok, TUX can do it. Now list for me some server that really matters > other than web and ftp? Now now, that's unfair. We should be able to do it in user space. I think the question you _should_ be lobbying at Ben and the other aio people is how the aio stuff could do zero-copy from disk cache to the network, ie do the things that Tux does internally where it does nonblocking reads from disk ad then sends them out non-blocking to the network without havign to copy the data _or_ have to use extremely expensive TLB mapping tricks to get at it.. Ie tie the "sendfile" and "aio" threads together, and ask Ben if we can do aio-sendfile and have thousands of asynchronous sendfiles going on at the same time, like Tux can do. And if not, then why not? Missing or bad interfaces? Ben? Doing user-space IO is all well and good, but that extra copy and TLB stuff kills you. Tell us how to do it ;) 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/