Il 04/02/2013 18:51, Fabien Chouteau ha scritto: > On 02/04/2013 06:35 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Il 04/02/2013 16:07, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto: >>>>> No idea why the windows version has been mixing g_poll() and select(). >>>>> I'd hope that this series kills select() for uniformity's sake, but the >>>>> 00/10 subject and the commit msg for this patch indicate otherwise. >>> This is why I CCed Fabien. I left the g_poll-followed-by-select >>> behavior. It may be to do with Windows treating sockets different from >>> other objects. Paolo may know the answer, too. >> >> Windows uses g_poll for HANDLEs and select for sockets. All sockets are >> configured to trigger an event handle when there is a change in the >> socket availability, so g_poll exits and select is reexecuted. > > Yes, the reason for this select() call is that we know when an event > occurred on one socket, but we don't know what kind of event and which > socket. > > Would it be different if we had a HANDLE for each socket, instead of > one for all?
Nope, I think you cannot assign different events for read and write. Paolo
