| |||||||||||||
Simpler sysletsSimpler sysletsPosted Dec 10, 2007 23:10 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304)In reply to: Simpler syslets by josh Parent article: Simpler syslets
Also, because the completion function is called in the original process --- well, what do the old and new tasks share? If they share as little as POSIX processes, the completion function is going to have to resort to something nasty like a pipe read by the other process just to communicate with itself.
(Log in to post comments)
Simpler syslets Posted Dec 10, 2007 23:31 UTC (Mon) by i3839 (guest, #31386) [Link] I think that's what the ugly syslet_ring_wait() is meant for. I see a lot of unnecessary complexity, where should I drop my feedback, lkml or lwn? I'll mail it to lkml tomorrow...
Simpler syslets Posted Dec 11, 2007 6:39 UTC (Tue) by butlerm (subscriber, #13312) [Link] In the current patch, the parent and child share virtually everything (VM, FS, files, etc) - i.e. the child task is essentially a thread, not an independent POSIX process. I can hardly imagine why anyone would want to do anything else.Also, the more sophisticated functionality is not being abandoned, it is just being put off in the name of initial simplicity. The announcement has the details.
|
|||||||||||||