Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 12:45:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 12:45:00 -0400 Received: from penguin.e-mind.com ([195.223.140.120]:4950 "EHLO penguin.e-mind.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 12:44:59 -0400 Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 18:49:35 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Benjamin LaHaise , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aio@kvack.org Subject: Re: async-io API registration for 2.5.29 Message-ID: <20020730164935.GI1181@dualathlon.random> References: <20020730054111.GA1159@dualathlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i X-GnuPG-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.gnupg.asc X-PGP-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1806 Lines: 45 On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 06:34:53AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > > this patch against 2.5.29 adds the async-io API as from latest Ben's > > patch. > > Why not make the io_submit system call number 251 like it apparently is > already in 2.4.x? We're really close to it anyway, so if you just re-order > the system calls a bit (and leave 250 as sys_ni_syscall), you're basically > there. > > Other than that it looks good. thank you very much for checking it. Since Ben asked for waiting his patch you can reject may patch, that's really fine with me as far as it doesn't take months for his patch to showup. my patch is in perfect sync with his latest code on the web. as said I never claimed current API is stupid as Christph understood, I said I'd preferred a sys_aio_read/write/fsync etc... but I could live fine with sys_io_submit too, it wasn't too bad enough to make me rewrite it. With my patch I mainly wanted to raise eyes on this issue so we can hopefully get an API registered in a few weeks in mainline. I'm completely flexbile to rewrite the API too if anybody find good reasons for it (or if you say, sys_io_submit is too ugly please change to sys_aio_read/write/etc..). As Ben said the API is the only thing that is been mostly stable so far, this is one more reason I felt this is the right way to proceed instead of building the dynamic syscall slowdown overhead layer that as best (unsure for sys_io_sumbit 250) is forward binary compatible with 2.5 by pure luck. thanks, Andrea - 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/