[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a36005b50705030640t1169c2d0g1c6cf9d5ec9a9d36@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 06:40:54 -0700
From: "Ulrich Drepper" <drepper@...il.com>
To: "Davi Arnaut" <davi@...ent.com.br>
Cc: "Eric Dumazet" <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Davide Libenzi" <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 14/22] pollfs: pollable futex
On 5/2/07, Davi Arnaut <davi@...ent.com.br> wrote:
> The usage cases of yours are quite different from mine. We don't use a
> single file descriptor to to manage various resources. The worker threads
> are _not going_ to have a file descriptor, _only_ the event dispatching
> (poll)
> thread.
An model which doesn't scale well.
> A pollable futex is even more useful for _single_ threaded programs that
> don't want to go into lengthy hacks to monitor events coming from the
> outside
> world.
There is nothing here that cannot be done with a more complete model
for event handling. It's Linus decision whether he wants to add yet
more code, yet more possible problems, yet more maintenance
overhead/nightmare for an interim solution which isn't necessary,
which cannot solve all the problems, and which is not as scalable as
other proposed methods.
I can only say that I would be trickly against it. It makes just no sense.
-
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