[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4565FA60.9000402@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:45:36 -0800
From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
To: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
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>
Subject: Re: [take25 1/6] kevent: Description.
Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> Kernel does not put there a new entry, it is only done inside
> kevent_wait(). Entries are put into queue (in any context), where they can be obtained
> from only kevent_wait() or kevent_get_events().
I know this is how it's done now. But it is not where it has to end.
IMO we have to get to a solution where new events are posted to the ring
buffer asynchronously, i.e., without a thread calling kevent_wait. And
then you need the extra parameter and verification. Even if it's today
not needed we have to future-proof the interface since it cannot be
changed once in use.
--
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
-
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