Hi Christoph, On 02/18/2015 06:36 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Hi Robert, > > your above commit pokes into kiocb internals it really should not, and > it breaks my patchset that's been on the -fsdevel list which makes most > of the kiocb guts private to fs/aio.c. > > First please Cc patches like that to linux-fsdevel. Second I don't > think the logic in it is correct. You should not disable your own > notifications based on how aio works, but do it unconditionally. What > was the reason to disable the eventfd notification if there is an aio > one as well? > Sometimes we would like to have one endpoint handled in separate thread. It could have its own eventfd, which notifies only about events on its own requests. We don't want to notify main event loop in main thread about these events, because it doesn't make sense. The another example is using AIO hidden under synchronous API to have timeout feature. We submit AIO transfer with own eventfd, we select() on this eventfd with given timeout, and if timeout expired we cancel transfer. Then we don't want to notify main event loop about async transfer completion, because from users point of view performed operation looks like synchronous. Most of requests will be handled using ffs eventfd, but when we supply another one to selected transfer, we rather don't want to have notification on the first one. Robert -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
