Re: [Kiobuf-io-devel] Re: 1st glance at kiobuf overhead in kernelaio vs pread vs user aio

2001-02-02 Thread Rajagopal Ananthanarayanan
Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > > Hey Ingo, > > On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > - first of all, great patch! I've got a conceptual question: exactly how > > does the AIO code prevent filesystem-related scheduling in the issuing > > process' context? I'd like to use (and test) your AIO co

Re: [Kiobuf-io-devel] Re: 1st glance at kiobuf overhead in kernelaio vs pread vs user aio

2001-02-02 Thread Ingo Molnar
On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > Thanks! Right now the code does the page cache lookup allocations and > lookups in the caller's thread, [...] (the killer is not the memory allocation(s), if there is enough RAM then we can get a free page without having to block.) The real problem

Re: [Kiobuf-io-devel] Re: 1st glance at kiobuf overhead in kernelaio vs pread vs user aio

2001-02-02 Thread Benjamin LaHaise
Hey Ingo, On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Ingo Molnar wrote: > - first of all, great patch! I've got a conceptual question: exactly how > does the AIO code prevent filesystem-related scheduling in the issuing > process' context? I'd like to use (and test) your AIO code for TUX, but i > do not see where it's