On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Ok, here's another entry in this discussion.
That's another way to do it. But you end up creating/destroying a new thread for every request. May be performing just fine. Another, even simpler way IMO, is to just have a plain per-task kthread pool, and a queue. An async_submit() drops a request in the queue, and wakes the requests queue-head where the kthreads are sleeping. One kthread picks up the request, service it, drops a result in the result queue, and wakes results queue-head (where async_fetch() are sleeping). Cancellation is not problem here (by the mean of sending a signal to the service kthread). Also, no problem with arch-dependent code. This is a 1:1 match of what my userspace implementation does. Of course, no hot-path optimization are performed here, and you need a few context switches more than necessary. Let's have Zach (Ingo support to Zach would be great) play with the optimized version, and then we can maybe bench the three to see if the more complex code that the optimized version require, gets a pay-back from the performance side. /me thinks it likely will - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
