Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 20 Nov 2002 15:57:26 -0800 (PST) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: [rfc] epoll interface change and glibc bits ... |
| |
On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Mark Mielke wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 03:19:30PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Mark Mielke wrote: > > > > struct epoll_event { > > > > unsigned short events; > > > > unsigned short revents; > > > > __uint64_t obj; > > > > }; > > > Forget any argument I had against removing 'fd'. This sounds good. > > > Perhaps 'obj' should be named 'userdata'? > > > struct epoll_event { > > > unsigned short events; > > > unsigned short revents; > > > __uint64_t userdata; > > > }; > > Do we want to have a union instead of a direct 64bit int ? > > I was going to suggest this, except I couldn't figure out what to > suggest that it look like... I finally figured that the value could be > cast, or wrapped in a union by userspace (although theoretically, this > might mean more words than absolutely necessary to initialize on a > 32-bit CPU...) > > What were you thinking? 1X64 bit or 2X32 bit?
Something like :
typedef union epoll_obj { void *ptr; __uint32_t u32[2]; __uint64_t u64; } epoll_obj_t;
I'm open to suggestions though. The "ptr" enable me to avoid wierd casts to avoid gcc screaming.
- 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/
| |