Re: Is sendfile all that sexy?

Felix von Leitner (leitner@convergence.de)
Tue, 16 Jan 2001 13:47:37 +0100


Thus spake Ingo Molnar (mingo@elte.hu):
> > I don't know how Linux does it, but returning the first free file
> > descriptor can be implemented as O(1) operation.
> to put it more accurately: the requirement is to be able to open(), use
> and close() an unlimited number of file descriptors with O(1) overhead,
> under any allocation pattern, with only RAM limiting the number of files.
> Both of my proposals attempt to provide this. It's possible to open() O(1)
> but do a O(log(N)) close(), but that is of no practical value IMO.

I cheated. I was only talking about open().
close() is of course more expensive then.

Other than that: where does the requirement come from?
Can't we just use a free list where we prepend closed fds and always use
the first one on open()? That would even increase spatial locality and
be good for the CPU caches.

Felix
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/