[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061123122335.GE20294@2ka.mipt.ru>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 15:23:36 +0300
From: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, 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>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
Alexander Viro <aviro@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [take24 0/6] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 01:02:00PM -0800, Ulrich Drepper (drepper@...hat.com) wrote:
> Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> >But in this case it will be impossible to have SIGEV_THREAD and
> >SIGEV_KEVENT
> >at the same time, it will be just the same as SIGEV_SIGNAL but with
> >different delivery mechanism. Is is what you expect for that?
>
> Yes, that's expected. The event if for the queue, not directed to a
> specific thread.
>
> If in future we want to think about preferably waking a specific thread
> we can then think about it. But I doubt that'll be beneficial. The
> thread specific part in the signal handling is only used to implement
> the SIGEV_THREAD notification.
Ok, so please review patch I sent, if it is ok from design point of
view, I will run some tests here.
> --
> ➧ 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 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