lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: accept() improvements for rt signals
Hi,

On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 09:45:52 -0800, Dan Kegel <dank@alumni.caltech.edu>
said:

> If the overall mantra of the F_SETSIG etc. api is "You never need
> to call poll() except when the RT sig queue overflows", though,
> we need to have events generated during the entire lifetime
> of each socket fd. Currently, there's a gap between the
> accept() and when rt signal generation is turned on for the fd,
> so you need to do a poll() to see if data arrived on the socket
> between accept() and F_SETSIG etc.

That's not quite correct. The mantra of F_SETSIG is that you never ever
have to do anything unscalable like polling on every fd you have open
when only a few have activity. The poll() you describe above is a
single non-blocking poll on one single fd, which doesn't have the
scalability problems inherent in making your whole event loop revolve
around poll().

> It would add some pleasing symmetry if the enhanced accept() also
> generated a queued notifier.

Agreed.

--Stephen

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [W:0.171 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site