[lkml]   [1997]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: >256 fd patch...
       From: (Alan Cox)
    Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 23:41:23 +0000 (GMT)

    > Most importantly, select() isn't critical path code!!! If the execution
    > time of select gets increased by (say) 20 or 40 cycles, no one is going
    > to be able to notice the difference. We're talking nanoseconds
    > here.....

    A quick profile of my kernel with a mass of straces shows that almost
    every select done is passed 256 as the table size, and everyone seems to
    be using the fd table size as an argument

    Well, all of *my* code uses maxfds+1 --- I didn't realize everyone was
    quite that broken. :-)

    What set of programs were in your sample set?

    - Ted

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:39    [W:0.022 / U:17.896 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site