[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5115FC6A.8000603@250bpm.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 08:36:10 +0100
From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@...bpm.com>
To: Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Sha Zhengju <handai.szj@...bao.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] eventfd: implementation of EFD_MASK flag
On 09/02/13 04:54, Eric Wong wrote:
>>> Using one eventfd per userspace socket still seems a bit wasteful.
>>
>> Wasteful in what sense? Occupying a slot in file descriptor table?
>> That's the price for having the socket uniquely identified by the
>> fd.
>
> Yes. I realize eventfd is small, but I don't think eventfd is needed
> at all, here. Just one pipe.
Ah. Got you! You mean not to change the kernel, just use pipe for the
purpose.
However, the convoluted pipe-style design is the problem I am trying to
solve rather than the solution. It leads to convoluted APIs with
convoluted semantics as described in the article. I've been using that
kind of design for past 8 years and every time I have to deal with it I
swear that one day I will implement a proper in-kernel solution to get
rid of the hack.
And now I have finally done so.
Martin
--
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