Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 13:57:53 -0800 From: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com> To: Arjan de Vet <Arjan.deVet@adv.iae.nl> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: AIO was Re: Kernel threads Message-ID: <20000110135752.C4938@sturm.canonware.com> In-Reply-To: <20000110224829.A24711@adv.iae.nl>; from Arjan.deVet@adv.iae.nl on Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 10:48:29PM %2B0100 References: <20000106095248.A10302@adv.iae.nl> <Pine.SOL.4.10.10001061433220.9535-100000@rodan.syr.edu> <20000110224829.A24711@adv.iae.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 10:48:29PM +0100, Arjan de Vet wrote: > Christopher Sedore wrote: > > >On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Arjan de Vet wrote: > > > >> Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > >> > >> >This is very interesting data and I was just wondering about the > >> >actual state of functionality in our AIO code just the other day, > >> >oddly enough. Does anyone have a PR# for the mentioned patches? > >> > >> kern/12053 > >> > >> A Dec 16 version of the patch can be found at: > >> > >> http://tfeed.maxwell.syr.edu/aio-diff > >> > >> They won't apply cleanly because some new syscalls have been added. > > > >There may be another PR related too (although a quick search a few seconds > >ago didn't show it)--this patch set also fixes a problem where signals > >were not posted for aio completion under certain circumstances (the code > >just wasn't there before). > > > >Just found the PR--kern/13075 > > Now that we've found the two PRs and a reasonable up to date version of > the patch are these changes going to be committed? Or are they still > under review? Just curious ;-). I'm reviewing them right now. Jason 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?20000110135752.C4938>