Re: [patch 00/11] ANNOUNCE: "Syslets", generic asynchronous systemcall support

[Davide Libenzi]

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> 
> * Davide Libenzi <davidel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > > Open issues:
> 
> > If this is going to be a generic AIO subsystem:
> > 
> > - Cancellation of pending request
> 
> How about implementing aio_cancel() as a NOP. Can anyone prove that the 
> kernel didnt actually attempt to cancel that IO? [but unfortunately 
> failed at doing so, because the platters were being written already.]
> 
> really, what's the point behind aio_cancel()?

You need cancel. If you scheduled an async syscall, and the "session" 
linked with that chain is going away, you better have that canceled before 
cleaning up buffers to where the chain is going to read/write.
If you keep and hash or a tree indexed by atom-ptr, than become a matter 
of a lookup and sending a signal.



- Davide


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/