On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Ian Kent <[email protected]> wrote: > It's just that your earlier comment regarding a concurrency issue led > > me to wonder about the use of Pthreads. In particular, I'm not sure > > what the rationale was, but I'd also like to understand the control > > flow, so that's why I was interested in a design document of some > > sort. > > Right. > > One of the things that v5 does is to move the master map parsing out of > the init script and into the daemon itself. That means that the daemon > then has to manage each of the master map mounts as well. Using > individual sub-processes has a whole set of problems related to the > supervising process communicating with and knowing the state of those > sub-processes so v5 changed to a threaded model which of course has it's > own set of difficulties.
Does the daemon need multiple processes/threads because of the ioctl(2) calls that block? On a related note, is the autofs device a step towards a completely revised kernel interface? I've started to contemplate the use of socket pairs instead of pipes and ioctl(2) calls. (NBD seems to be a simple example of this style.)
_______________________________________________ autofs mailing list [email protected] http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
