Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 22:29:59 -0400 (EDT) From: "John W. DeBoskey" <jwd@unx.sas.com> To: wes@softweyr.com (Wes Peters) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/13075 (was: Re: aio_*) Message-ID: <199909190229.WAA32777@bb01f39.unx.sas.com> In-Reply-To: From Wes Peters at "Sep 16, 1999 5:52: 1 pm"
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hand up...
I have two machines running heavily hit aio based file server
mechanisms. If the patches will apply to a -current system about
2 weeks old I'll give it a try... (atleast without too much trouble).
And now for a wish:
/*----------------------------------------------------------+
| ST_AIO |
| |
| A task in the ST_AIO state means that one of our |
| aio_writes has finished. we will loop thru all |
| outstanding aio_writes to see which one completed. |
| |
*----------------------------------------------------------*/
case ST_AIO:
/*-----------------------------------------------------+
| loop to get completed write process. |
*-----------------------------------------------------*/
for (j=0; j<MAX_WRITERS; j++) {
if (aio[j].task &&
aio_error(&aio[j].iocb) != EINPROGRESS) {
ie: you have to loop to determine which aio operation completed.
Looking thru the kernel, I don't see any easy way to fix this.
But then, I may be missing something (which I don't understand)
about how to setup the sigevent structure:
Aio generates the signal for me (setup via the sigevent struct),
but the sigev_value is not passed depending on how the kernel
processes the signal.
Thanks,
John
> Christopher Sedore wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Wes Peters wrote:
> >
> > > Christopher Sedore wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you by any change have an idea how to fix PR kern/13075
> > > > > (signal is not posted for async I/O on raw devices)
> > > >
> > > > Yes. There is no code to post the signal unless the job is of the lio
> > > > variety. Writing a fix took about 15 minutes (including reboot).
> > > > Extensive testing not included, though the test program provided with the
> > > > PR now functions.
> > >
> > > Great, now do you want to tackle aio_cancel? ;^)
> >
> > I've been holding off to see whether I can get the other aio patches for
> > improved socket io committed. I don't want to do two versions of
> > aio_cancel (the changes for sockets alter the way things are queued and
> > hence the way that cancels have to be done).
>
> Good to hear. OK, show of hands: who's using aio_* and has the time to
> test patches for Christopher?
>
> - --
> "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
>
> Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
> http://softweyr.com/ wes@softweyr.com
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
>
> ------------------------------
>
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?199909190229.WAA32777>