Re: [rfc] epoll interface change and glibc bits ...

From: Jamie Lokier (lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 18 2002 - 17:56:25 EST


Davide Libenzi wrote:
> Ok, the message has been post and noone argued about your solution. Like
> it is used to say "speak now or forever hold your piece" :) So we will go
> with it, no problem for me. We will define a struct epollfd and all POLL*
> bits in EPOLL*

1. Fwiw, I would really like to see epoll extended beyond fds, to a more
general edge-triggered event collector - signals, timers, aios. I've
written about this before as you know (but been too busy lately to
pursue the idea). I'm not going to say any more about this until I
have time to code something...

2. I don't like the "int64_t" proposal because there is no
   language guarantee that 64 bits is enough to hold a pointer - and
   of course, a pointer is what many applications will store in it.

   "long" seems to be the de facto standard for holding a pointer
   value in the kernel (e.g. in a futex). That's ugly too, but quite
   consistent. Nothing clean presents itself.

-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Nov 23 2002 - 22:00:25 EST