Re: [KVM-RFC PATCH 1/2] eventfd: add an explicit srcu based notifierinterface

From: Gregory Haskins
Date: Tue Jun 16 2009 - 13:01:30 EST

Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>> Does this all make sense?
> This conversation has been *really* long, and I haven't had time to look
> at the patch yet. But looking at the amount of changes, and the amount of
> even more changes talked in this thread, there's a very slim chance that
> I'll ACK the eventfd code.
> You may want to consider a solution that does not litter eventfd code that
> much.
> - Davide
Hi Davide,

I understand your position and value your time/insight into looking at
this things.

Despite the current ongoing discussion, I still stand that the current
patch is my proposed solution (though I have yet to convince Michael).
But in any case, if you have the time, please look it over because I
still think its the right direction to head in.

The general solution is that we use an srcu list instead of the
wait-queue, and thats really it. If we can't eliminate that spinlock
held over the notification, it has usability implications at least for
irqfd/iosignalfd. The only way I can think of to solve the problem
without modifying eventfd is to not use eventfd at all. :(

Since using eventfd really captures the concept we are going for here
really well, reusing it has a ton of advantages including interface
compatibility and, of course, code-reuse of a tested/debugged code
base. Heck, we may hopefully even improve eventfd for other users in
doing this work. It would therefore be a shame to walk away from it if
it can be avoided.

So if what I proposed is not acceptable but you are willing to work with
me to find a solution that is, that would be ideal from my perspective.
Otherwise, I apologize for all the noise. You have been quite the
patient and helpful gentleman with me to date and I appreciate that.

Kind Regards,

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature