Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Synchronous signal delivery.. | From | James Antill <> | Date | 15 Feb 2003 14:19:54 -0500 |
| |
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/
| |