Re: [PATCH 0 of 4] Generic AIO by scheduling stacks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



- We would now have some measure of task_struct concurrency. Read that twice,
it's scary.

That's the one scaring me in fact ... Maybe it will end up being an easy
one but I don't feel too comfortable...

Indeed, that was my first reaction too. I dismissed the idea for a good six months after initially realizing that it implied sharing journal_info, etc.

But when I finally sat down and started digging through the task_struct members and, after quickly dismissing involuntary preemption of the fibrils, it didn't seem so bad. I haven't done an exhaustive audit yet (and I won't advocate merging until I have) but I haven't seen any train wrecks.

we didn't create fibril-like
things for threads, instead, we share PIDs between tasks. I wonder if
the sane approach would be to actually create task structs (or have a
pool of them pre-created sitting there for performances) and add a way
to share the necessary bits so that syscalls can be run on those
spin-offs.

Maybe, if it comes to that. I have some hopes that sharing by default and explicitly marking the bits that we shouldn't share will be good enough.

- z
-
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/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux