Re: hacking - aio_sendfile()

  Adrian,

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 04:36:23PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
A> I've started writing an aio_sendfile() syscall.
A> 
A> http://people.freebsd.org/~adrian/ath/20130710-aio-sendfile-3.diff
A> 
A> Yes, the diff is against -HEAD and not stable/9.
A> 
A> It's totally horrible, hackish and likely bad. I've only done some
A> very, very basic testing to ensure it actually works; i haven't at all
A> stress tested it out yet. It's also very naive - I'm not at all doing
A> any checks to see whether I can short-cut to do the aio there and
A> then; I'm always queuing the sendfile() op through the worker threads.
A> That's likely stupid and inefficient in a lot of cases, but it at
A> least gets the syscall up and working.
A> 
A> I'd like some feedback and possibly some help in stress testing it to
A> make sure it's functioning well.

Apart from problem pointed out by Kostik, there is a race between
aio thread starting with aio_process_sendfile() and file descriptor
(or socket descriptor) going away.

Thus, kern_sendfile() needs to be split into two parts: kern_sendfile_pre()
and kern_sendfile() that should contain only the sending cycle.

The kern_sendfile_pre() should contain:

fgetvp_read(uap->fd, &vp)
vm_object_reference_locked(vp->v_object)

Referencing the socket is probably also required. Current synchronous
code doesn't do it.

The do_sendfile() function should call kern_sendfile_pre() and then
kern_sendfile(). The aio code should perform kern_sendfile_pre() in the
new syscall itself in context of calling process, and kern_sendfile()
in async context.

P.S. Some time ago I have started hacking on the above.

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.