Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 3 Feb 2002 19:59:10 -0500 (EST) | From | Aaron Sethman <> | Subject | Re: [Coder-Com] Re: PROBLEM: high system usage / poor SMPnetwork performance |
| |
On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Dan Kegel wrote:
> Kev wrote: > > > > > The /dev/epoll patch is good, but the interface is different enough > > > from /dev/poll that ircd would need a new engine_epoll.c anyway. > > > (It would look like a cross between engine_devpoll.c and engine_rtsig.c, > > > as it would need to be notified by os_linux.c of any EWOULDBLOCK return values. > > > Both rtsigs and /dev/epoll only provide 'I just became ready' notification, > > > but no 'I'm not ready anymore' notification.) > > > > I don't understand what it is you're saying here. The ircu server uses > > non-blocking sockets, and has since long before EfNet and Undernet branched, > > so it already handles EWOULDBLOCK or EAGAIN intelligently, as far as I know. > > Right. poll() and Solaris /dev/poll are programmer-friendly; they give > you the current readiness status for each socket. ircu handles them fine.
I would have to agree with this comment. Hybrid-ircd deals with poll() and /dev/poll just fine. We have attempted to make it use rtsig, but it just doesn't seem to agree with the i/o model we are using, which btw, is the same model that Squid (is/will be?) using. I haven't played with /dev/epoll yet, but I pray it is nothing like rtsig.
Basically what we need is, something like poll() but not so nasty. /dev/poll is okay, but its a hack. The best thing I've seen so far, but it too seems to take the idea so far is FreeBSD's kqueue stuff(which Hybrid-ircd handles quite nicely).
Regards,
Aaron
- 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/
| |