1st glance at kiobuf overhead in kernel aio vs pread vs user aio

2001-02-02 Thread bcrl
Hey folks, First off, sorry for spamming all the mailing lists, but I want to make sure that everyone interested in kiobufs, aio and the like sees this. Since the mass of discussion going on about kiobufs started, I ran a few tests of the behaviour of various code when reading from a cached ~700m

Re: [Kiobuf-io-devel] RFC: Kernel mechanism: Compound event wait/notify + callback chains

2001-02-01 Thread bcrl
On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > A kiobuf is 124 bytes, a buffer_head 96. And a buffer_head is additionally > used for caching data, a kiobuf not. Go measure the cost of a distant cache miss, then complain about having everything in one structure. Also, 1 kiobuf maps 16-128 times

Re: [Kiobuf-io-devel] RFC: Kernel mechanism: Compound event wait/notify + callback chains

2001-02-01 Thread bcrl
On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > Linus list of reasons like the amount of state are more interesting The state is required, not optional, if we are to have a decent basis for building asyncronous io into the kernel. > Networking wants something lighter rather than heavier. Adding tons of >