On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 01:12:57PM +, Alan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > I'm sure others would want them then for their favourite system call combo
> > too. If they were really useful it might make more sense to have a batch()
> > system call that works for arbitary calls, but I'm not convinc
> I'm sure others would want them then for their favourite system call combo
> too. If they were really useful it might make more sense to have a batch()
> system call that works for arbitary calls, but I'm not convinced yet
> it's even needed. It would be certainly ugly.
batch() would possibly m
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 02:08:10PM +0100, Andi Kleen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Evgeniy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > aio_sendfile_path() is essentially aio_sendfile(), except that it takes
> > source filename as parameter, has a pointer to private header
> > and its size (which a
Evgeniy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> aio_sendfile_path() is essentially aio_sendfile(), except that it takes
> source filename as parameter, has a pointer to private header
> and its size (which allows to send header and file's content in one syscall
> instead of three (open, send, sen
Kevent based generic AIO.
This patch only implements network AIO, which is _COMPLETELY_
impossible and broken in _ANY_ micro-thread design. For details
and test consider following link:
http://tservice.net.ru/~s0mbre/blog/2007/02/10#2007_02_10
Designing AIO without network in mind can only be
