On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 04:22:28PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Another blocking operation used by applications that want aio > > functionality is that of opening files that are not resident in memory. > > Using the thread based aio helper, add support for IOCB_CMD_OPENAT. > > So I think this is ridiculously ugly. > > AIO is a horrible ad-hoc design, with the main excuse being "other, > less gifted people, made that design, and we are implementing it for > compatibility because database people - who seldom have any shred of > taste - actually use it". > > But AIO was always really really ugly. > > Now you introduce the notion of doing almost arbitrary system calls > asynchronously in threads, but then you use that ass-backwards nasty > interface to do so. [ ... ] > I'm adding Ingo the to cc, because I think Ingo had a "run this list > of system calls" patch at one point - in order to avoid system call > overhead. I don't think that was very interesting (because system call > overhead is seldom all that noticeable for any interesting system > calls), but with the "let's do the list asynchronously" addition it > might be much more intriguing. Ingo, do I remember correctly that it > was you? I might be confused about who wrote that patch, and I can't > find it now. Zach Brown and Ingo traded a bunch of ideas. There were chicklets and syslets? A little search, it looks like acall was a slightly different iteration, but the patches didn't make it off oss.oracle.com: https://lwn.net/Articles/316806/ -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
