> Ugh. SIGIO is evil and should never be used. I tried using SIGIO for > tty I/O many years ago and it was a total disaster - it used an > unbelievable amount of cpu due to the signal overhead :-) blocked, queued real-time sigio with siginfo goop slurped sync via sigwaitinfo().. i think we've covered this :) > > I theoretically own the rights to BestWWWD if only I could find the piece > of paper. It shouldn't be an issue any longer with Best/Verio, I'll see > what can be done. I'm interested. -- zach - - - - - - 007 373 5963 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- review? Remy Nonnenmacher
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- review? David Greenman
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- review? Matthew Dillon
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- review? Bosko Milekic
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- rev... Matthew Dillon
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- rev... Bosko Milekic
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- review? Zach Brown
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- review? Matthew Dillon
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- rev... Zach Brown
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- rev... Matthew Dillon
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- rev... Zach Brown
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- rev... Jonathan M. Bresler
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- rev... Tony Finch
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- rev... Matthew Dillon
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- review? Remy Nonnenmacher
- Re: mbuf wait code (revisited) -- review? Kip Macy