lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: async poll
On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, John Gardiner Myers wrote:

> Davide Libenzi wrote:
>
> >Why would you want to have a single fd simultaneously handled by two
> >different threads with all the locking issues that would arise ?
> >
> You would not want this to happen. Thus you would want the poll
> facility to somehow prevent returning event N+1 until after the thread
> that got event N has somehow indicated that it has finished handling the
> event.

We're again looping talking about threads and fd being bounced between
threads. It seems that we've very different opinions about the use of
threads and how server applications should be designed. IMHO if you're
thinking of bouncing fds among threads for their handling you're doing
something somehow wrong, but this is just my opinion ...



- Davide




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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:30    [W:0.166 / U:0.452 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site