From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Mar 4 21:23: 9 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [209.249.129.138]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DD4914E0F for ; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 21:23:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA56233; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 21:21:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Message-Id: <199903050521.VAA56233@rah.star-gate.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Terry Lambert Cc: dyson@iquest.net, dick@tar.com, jplevyak@inktomi.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: lockf and kernel threads In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Mar 1999 03:44:32 GMT." <199903050344.UAA24997@usr01.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 21:21:10 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Actually, given that most likely we have quite a few ex-VMS hackers I am surprised that you have to explain or sell the idea of an async gate maybe you ought to refer to the term as a QIO 8) Cheers, Amancio > > > IMO, the Linux threading, in particular, and the POSIX aio and thread > > > interfaces, in general, represents a bunch of ill-thought-out hacks > > > on hacks by the respective Linux and POSIX responsible persons. The > > > Linux hacks were by people who didn't know better, and the POSIX > > > hacks were political by people who did know better, but didn't have > > > the courage of their convictions. It is time for some considered > > > design. > > > > The AIO api has to be implemented for legitimacy, and likewise the > > threading. In fact, the AIO API is quite useful. > > > It doesn't have to be implemented in kernel space. > > An async call gate could all you to implement POSIX AIO in user space, > at the same time not buying into the POSIX error of implementing only > a few calls as asynchronous. > > Don't you agree that it's moronic that I can't, for example, do > an asynchronous bind(2)? > > What about an asynchronous SYSV IPC message send or receive? > > From a kernel perspective, POSIX is an old coat, which you leave > lying around in user space, but which you don't wear into the > shower with you (kernel space). > > > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org > --- > Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present > or previous employers. > > > 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