lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: Synchronous signal delivery..
    From
    Date
    Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> writes:

    > On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    >
    > > > > One of the reasons for the "flags" field (which is not unused) was because
    > > > > I thought it might have extensions for things like alarms etc.
    > > >
    > > > I was thinking more like :
    > > >
    > > > int timerfd(int timeout, int oneshot);
    > >
    > > It could be a separate system call, ...
    >
    > I would personally like it a lot to have timer events available on
    > pollable fds. Am I alone in this ?

    Think of "timer events" as a single TCP connection, so you have...

    time X: empty
    time X+Y: timed event "Arrives"
    time X+Z: timed event "Arrives"

    ...at which point it's pretty obvious that if you "poll" the timer
    event queue from anytime before X+Y it'll be empty, and anytime after
    X+Y it'll be "full". There isn't any point in being able to distinguish
    between the events X+Y and X+Z, you only need to know a timed event has
    occurred so you should process all timed events that are needed.
    At which point you just need to work out the difference between X and
    X+Y, and pass that to poll/sigtimedwait/etc.

    --
    # James Antill -- james@and.org
    :0:
    * ^From: .*james@and\.org
    /dev/null
    -
    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 13:33    [W:3.251 / U:0.012 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site