On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 15:23:09 +0530, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 09.03.2011, 10:22 +0100 schrieb Julien Cristau:
> > epoll_create1 was added in 2.6.27, afaict. If that's what haskell is
> > using, then it's not unexpected to have it fail on 2.6.26.
>
> good shot, thanks!
>
> From ./libraries/base/System/Event/EPoll.hsc: (this line does not start with
> ">")
>
> epollCreate :: IO EPollFd
> epollCreate = do
> fd <- throwErrnoIfMinus1 "epollCreate" $
> #if defined(HAVE_EPOLL_CREATE1)
> c_epoll_create1 (#const EPOLL_CLOEXEC)
> #else
> c_epoll_create 256 -- argument is ignored
> setCloseOnExec fd
> #endif
> let !epollFd' = EPollFd fd
> return epollFd'
>
> #if defined(HAVE_EPOLL_CREATE1)
> foreign import ccall unsafe "sys/epoll.h epoll_create1"
> c_epoll_create1 :: CInt -> IO CInt
> #else
> foreign import ccall unsafe "sys/epoll.h epoll_create"
> c_epoll_create :: CInt -> IO CInt
> #endif
>
>
> and in libraries/base/configure.ac:
> AC_CHECK_FUNCS([epoll_create1 epoll_ctl eventfd kevent kevent64 kqueue poll])
>
>
> So what is the conclusion? Do we need to disable the use of
> epoll_create1 completely? Or is it actually so that the libc should map
> uses of epoll_create1 to epoll_create? Or do we need to introduce
> run-time checks as to whether epoll_create1 is available?
>
Something like this, I think...
#if defined(HAVE_EPOLL_CREATE1)
fd = epoll_create1(EPOLL_CLOEXEC);
if (fd < 0 && errno == ENOSYS)
#endif
{
fd = epoll_create(256);
if (fd < 0 || fcntl(fd, F_SETFD, fcntl(fd, F_GETFD, 0) | FD_CLOEXEC) < 0)
return -1;
}
return fd;
Cheers,
Julien
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110309101230.gj12...@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr
