On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> Igor Sysoev wrote this message on Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 15:16 +0300:
> > > If you made this a fd transparent operation then I would agree with
> > > it.
> >
> > The current sendfile() implementation works with sockets only.
> > Well, I agree that such
Igor Sysoev wrote this message on Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 15:16 +0300:
> On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
>
> > Igor Sysoev wrote this message on Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 12:31 +0300:
> > > I think it can done in the following way - a socket should have flag
> > > that says that sendfile() had
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> Igor Sysoev wrote this message on Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 12:31 +0300:
> > I think it can done in the following way - a socket should have flag
> > that says that sendfile() had started the reading a page.
>
> layer violation...
I do not think that it's
Igor Sysoev wrote this message on Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 12:31 +0300:
> I think it can done in the following way - a socket should have flag
> that says that sendfile() had started the reading a page.
layer violation... how do you know that the fd is a socket?
> select()/poll()/kevent() should che
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Mike Silbersack wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Vivek Pai wrote:
> >
> > > If you were to have sendfile issue the disk reads, how would you signal
> > > completion? I guess one approach is to make the socket buffer appear to
> > > hav
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Igor Sysoev wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Robert Watson wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> > >
> > > > As to worker kthreads I think it's better to queue aio operation as it
> > > > was made in src/sys/kern
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Robert Watson wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> >
> > > As to worker kthreads I think it's better to queue aio operation as it
> > > was made in src/sys/kern/vfs_aio.c:aio_qphysio().
> >
> > One of the things tha
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Igor Sysoev wrote:
>
> > As to worker kthreads I think it's better to queue aio operation as it
> > was made in src/sys/kern/vfs_aio.c:aio_qphysio().
>
> One of the things that worries me about the proposal to use kernel worker
> th
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> As to worker kthreads I think it's better to queue aio operation as it
> was made in src/sys/kern/vfs_aio.c:aio_qphysio().
One of the things that worries me about the proposal to use kernel worker
threads to perform the I/O is that this can place a fairly
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Mike Silbersack wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Vivek Pai wrote:
>
> > If you were to have sendfile issue the disk reads, how would you signal
> > completion? I guess one approach is to make the socket buffer appear to
> > have no space while the sendfile-initiated read is in pro
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Vivek Pai wrote:
> If you were to have sendfile issue the disk reads, how would you signal
> completion? I guess one approach is to make the socket buffer appear to
> have no space while the sendfile-initiated read is in progress, but
> it seems to me that such an approach wou
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 01:25:43AM -0500, Vivek Pai wrote:
> Mike Silbersack wrote:
> >On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Vivek Pai wrote:
> >>The one other aspect of this is that sf_bufs mappings are maintained for
> >>a configurable amount of time, reducing the number of TLB ops. You can
> >>specify the paramet
Mike Silbersack wrote:
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Vivek Pai wrote:
The one other aspect of this is that sf_bufs mappings are maintained for
a configurable amount of time, reducing the number of TLB ops. You can
specify the parameter for how long, ranging from -1 (no coalescing at
all), 0 (coalesce, but fr
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Vivek Pai wrote:
> The one other aspect of this is that sf_bufs mappings are maintained for
> a configurable amount of time, reducing the number of TLB ops. You can
> specify the parameter for how long, ranging from -1 (no coalescing at
> all), 0 (coalesce, but free immediatel
Mike Silbersack wrote this message on Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 11:02 -0600:
> Suppose that sendfile is called to send to a non-blocking socket, and that
> it detects that the page(s) required are not in memory, and that disk I/O
> will be necessary. Instead of blocking, sendfile would call a sendfile
Sorry for not replying sooner - under deadline pressure right now.
Mike Silbersack wrote:
Ok, I've reread the debox paper, looked over the patch, and talked to Alan
Cox about his present and upcoming work on the vm system.
The debox patch does three basic things (if I'm understanding everything
co
16 matches
Mail list logo
