[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <455075E9.4080202@garzik.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 07:02:49 -0500
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Nate Diller <nate.diller@...il.com>
CC: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Oleg Verych <olecom@...wer.upol.cz>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Chase Venters <chase.venters@...entec.com>,
Johann Borck <johann.borck@...sedata.com>
Subject: Re: [take22 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
Nate Diller wrote:
> Indesiciveness has certainly been an issue here, but I remember akpm
> and Ulrich both giving concrete suggestions. I was particularly
> interested in Andrew's request to explain and justify the differences
> between kevent and BSD's kqueue interface. Was there a discussion
> that I missed? I am very interested to see your work on this
> mechanism merged, because you've clearly emphasized performance and
> shown impressive results. But it seems like we lose out on a lot by
> throwing out all the applications that already use kqueue.
kqueue looks pretty nice, the filter/note models in particular. I don't
see anything about ring buffers though.
I also wonder about the asynchronous event side (send), not just the
event reception side.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists