[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch, rfc] lt-epoll ( level triggered epoll ) ...
On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Valentin Nechayev wrote:

> Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 14:27:50, jamie wrote about "Re: [patch, rfc] lt-epoll ( level triggered epoll ) ...":
> > Actually I think _this_ is cleanest: A three-way flag per registered
> > fd interest saying whether to:
> >
> > 1. Report 0->1 edges for this interest. (Initial 1 counts as an event).
> > 2. Continually report 1 levels for this interest.
> > 3. One-shot, report the first time 1 is noted and unregister.
> >
> > ET poll is equivalent to 1. LT poll is equivalent to 2. dnotify's
> > one-shot mode is equivalent to 3.
> kqueue can do all three variants (1st with EV_CLEAR, 3rd with EV_ONESHOT).
> So, result of this whole epoll work is trivially predictable - Linux will have
> analog of "overbloated" and "poorly designed" kqueue, but more poor
> and with incompatible interface, adding its own stone to hell of
> different APIs. Congratulations.

See, this is a free world, and I very much respect your opinion. On the
other side you might want to actually *read* the kqueue man page and find
out of its 24590 flags, where 99% of its users will use only 1% of its
functionality. Talking about overbloating. You might also want to know
that quite a few kqueue users currently running on your favourite OS, are
moving to Linux+epoll. The reason is still unclear to me, but I can leave
you to discover it as exercise.

> Linus was true: Linux is just for fun, not for work.

You're right here. We're having *a lot* of fun listening this kind of

- Davide

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.109 / U:2.636 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site