Re: [PATCH] Futex Generalization Patch

From: Rusty Russell (rusty@rustcorp.com.au)
Date: Wed Apr 10 2002 - 11:37:57 EST

Next message: Kerl, John: "RE: Reducing root filesystem"
Previous message: E. Abbink: "Problem using mandatory locks (other apps can read/delete etc)"
In reply to: Hubertus Franke: "Re: [PATCH] Futex Generalization Patch"
Next in thread: Hubertus Franke: "Re: [PATCH] Futex Generalization Patch"
Reply: Hubertus Franke: "Re: [PATCH] Futex Generalization Patch"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

In message <20020410152354.169FF3FE06@smtp.linux.ibm.com> you write:
> Enclosed is an "asynchronous" extension to futexes.

Wow... I never thought of that. Cool!

My main concern is the DoS of multiple kmallocs. Alan Cox suggested
tying it to an fd (ie. naturally limited), and I think this might work
(I don't know much about async io). ie. (int)utime is the fd to wake
up, and then it can be used for async io OR a poll/select interface
using existing infrastructure.

Probably it has to be a special fd (/dev/futex?).

Thoughts?
Rusty.

--
  Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Kerl, John: "RE: Reducing root filesystem"
Previous message: E. Abbink: "Problem using mandatory locks (other apps can read/delete etc)"
In reply to: Hubertus Franke: "Re: [PATCH] Futex Generalization Patch"
Next in thread: Hubertus Franke: "Re: [PATCH] Futex Generalization Patch"
Reply: Hubertus Franke: "Re: [PATCH] Futex Generalization Patch"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 15 2002 - 22:00:16 EST