lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [take24 0/6] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
>> It is exactly how previous ring buffer (in mapped area though) was
>> implemented.
>
> Not any of those I saw. The one I looked at always started again at
> index 0 to fill the ring buffer. I'll wait for the next implementation.

I like the two-pointer ring buffer approach, one pointer for the
consumer and one for the producer.


> You don't want to have a channel like this. The userlevel code doesn't
> know which threads are waiting in the kernel on the event queue. And it

Agreed.


> You are still completely focused on AIO. We are talking here about a
> new generic event handling. It is not tied to AIO. We will add all

Agreed.


> As I said, relative timeouts are unable to cope with settimeofday calls
> or ntp adjustments. AIO is certainly usable in situations where
> timeouts are related to wall clock time.

I think we have lived with relative timeouts for so long, it would be
unusual to change now. select(2), poll(2), epoll_wait(2) all take
relative timeouts.

Jeff


-
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: 2006-11-20 22:49    [W:0.089 / U:4.732 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site