Ivan:
Ok, over we go ;-)
I do want to add this into Head here eventually so if you happen
to have an interest in umtx or kqueue you may want to take a close
look at this patch ;-)
R
On Jan 22, 2010, at 5:27 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
2010/1/22 Randall Stewart <r...@lakerest.net>:
All:
I have put together a patch against head that I would like
your opinion of.
So first what does it do?
Well one thing I thought lacking in the kernel was the ability
to send a cond event (umtx_cond) to a thread that was waiting
on a kqueue...
So the rough idea is I have N fd's and other things I am watching
but I would also like a local thread (maybe remote if the
umtx_cond_t is
in shared memory) to be able to wake me up as well.
This is a good and useful addition! I think Windows has implemented a
generalization of this (called "wait objects" or something like that),
which effectively allows a select()- (or in this case kqueue())-like
syscall to wait on both file descriptors and condvars (as well as
probably other MS-style objects). It's useful for multiplexing events
for dissimilar sources.
But you will probably soon receive a message to take this discussion
to hack...@freebsd.org, and I agree :)
------------------------------
Randall Stewart
803-317-4952 (cell)
803-345-0391(direct)
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
