Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:35:16 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Christopher Sedore <cmsedore@mailbox.syr.edu>
To:        Peter Dufault <dufault@hda.com>
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: aio_suspend() functionality
Message-ID:  <Pine.SOL.3.95.990422122242.5797E-100000@rodan.syr.edu>
In-Reply-To: <199904221439.KAA29489@hda.hda.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Thu, 22 Apr 1999, Peter Dufault wrote:

> > I sent a message a day or two ago asking if anyone had looked into
> > changing the behavior of aio_suspend so that it did not require a list of
> > aiocb's, but rather would accept an array of null pointers, and then fill
> > them in for you when an operation completed. 
> 
> Unfortunately this explicitly violates the standard so be sure to
> conditionalize it properly.  In 6.7.8.2 about the array:  "This
> array may contain NULL pointers, which shall be ignored."

I thought that a variant of aio_return that would sleep until a completed
io was ready might be a better alternative.  This would eliminate the need
to call aio_return as you are required to do with this modified
aio_suspend.

> The hooks POSIX tries to provide to implement what you want are
> via signals - using aio_sigevent, SIGEV_SIGNAL, "Realtime Signals",
> and the associated si_value for the completion cookie.

FreeBSD doesn't have support for this, does it?  I can't say I'm a fan of
the POSIX aio spec--seems a little crippled.

-Chris




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SOL.3.95.990422122242.5797E-100000>