[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c565f06d-8987-2117-589a-0c78ff6b4d47@samba.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 12:52:14 +0100
From: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org>
To: Daurnimator <quae@...rnimator.com>
Cc: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...labora.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
kernel@...labora.com, krisman@...labora.com,
pgriffais@...vesoftware.com, z.figura12@...il.com,
joel@...lfernandes.org, malteskarupke@...tmail.fm,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
GNU C Library <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, corbet@....net,
io-uring <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/13] Add futex2 syscall
Am 07.03.21 um 12:56 schrieb Daurnimator:
> On Sun, 7 Mar 2021 at 22:35, Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org> wrote:
>> Instead of having a blocked futex_waitv() waiting on an fd (maybe a generic eventfd() or a new futex2fd())
>> would be a better interface?
>
> Like bring back FUTEX_FD? (which was removed back in 2.6.25)
Ah, ok, yes something like that.
But as that was removed because of races, but might not be a good idea to bring it back.
metze
Powered by blists - more mailing lists