-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Uli doesn't care that much about async syscalls, but I think that from a
> kernel standpoint, we'd want to use this same indirect call for async
> scheduling,
Note that I added a flags parameter to sys_indirect in the v3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Uli doesn't care that much about async syscalls, but I think that from a
kernel standpoint, we'd want to use this same indirect call for async
scheduling,
Note that I added a flags parameter to sys_indirect in the v3 patch.
> BTW, I've botched the x86-on-x86_64 support. I have a patch but need to
> patch it before I'll submit v3 of the patch set. If you want to work on
> the patch and get syslet support going, let me know, I'll send the
> latest version.
I probably won't come around to trying sys_indirect with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Uli doesn't care that much about async syscalls,
At the moment I just care a lot more about getting the API straightened
out. An asynchronous incomplete/unsafe API is still an
incomplete/unsafe API.
BTW, I've botched the
Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> The following patches provide an alternative implementation of the
> sys_indirect system call which has been discussed a few times.
> This no system call allows us to extend existing system call
> interfaces with adding more system calls.
I might quarrel with some details,
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Zach Brown wrote:
>
> I think we can use this to pass per-syscall syslet data to the
> scheduler.
Yes, I mentioned this to Ulrich as one of the things that would make
sense.
Uli doesn't care that much about async syscalls, but I think that from a
kernel standpoint, we'd
The following patches provide an alternative implementation of the
sys_indirect system call which has been discussed a few times.
This no system call allows us to extend existing system call
interfaces with adding more system calls.
Davide's previous implementation is IMO far more complex than
The following patches provide an alternative implementation of the
sys_indirect system call which has been discussed a few times.
This no system call allows us to extend existing system call
interfaces with adding more system calls.
Davide's previous implementation is IMO far more complex than
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Zach Brown wrote:
I think we can use this to pass per-syscall syslet data to the
scheduler.
Yes, I mentioned this to Ulrich as one of the things that would make
sense.
Uli doesn't care that much about async syscalls, but I think that from a
kernel standpoint, we'd
Ulrich Drepper wrote:
The following patches provide an alternative implementation of the
sys_indirect system call which has been discussed a few times.
This no system call allows us to extend existing system call
interfaces with adding more system calls.
I might quarrel with some details, but
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Uli doesn't care that much about async syscalls,
At the moment I just care a lot more about getting the API straightened
out. An asynchronous incomplete/unsafe API is still an
incomplete/unsafe API.
BTW, I've botched the
BTW, I've botched the x86-on-x86_64 support. I have a patch but need to
patch it before I'll submit v3 of the patch set. If you want to work on
the patch and get syslet support going, let me know, I'll send the
latest version.
I probably won't come around to trying sys_indirect with
12 matches
Mail list logo
