[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [take24 0/6] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 12:34:50PM -0800, Ulrich Drepper ( wrote:
> Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> >>>Btw, what about putting aditional multiplexer into add/remove/modify
> >>>switch? There will be logical 'ready' addon?
> >>Is it needed? Usually this is done with a *_wait call with a timeout of
> >>zero. That code path might have to be optimized but it should already
> >>be there.
> >
> >It does not allow to mark events as ready.
> >And current interfaces wake up when either timeout is zero (in this case
> >thread itself does not sleep and can process events), or when there is
> >_new_ work - since there is no _new_ work, when thread awakened to
> >process it was killed, kernel does not think that something is wrong.
> Rather than mark an existing entry as ready, how about a call to inject
> a new ready event?
> This would be useful to implement functionality at userlevel and still
> use an event queue to announce the availability. Without this type of
> functionality we'd need to use indirect notification via signal or pipe
> or something like that.

With provided patch it is possible to wakeup 'for-free' - just call
kevent_ctl(ready) with zero number of ready events, so thread will be
awakened if it was in poll(kevent_fd), kevent_wait() or

> --
> ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View,
> CA ❖

Evgeniy Polyakov
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: 2006-11-24 12:03    [W:0.110 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site