On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:10:35 +0100
Ed Schouten wrote:
> * Ivan Voras wrote:
> > 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())
Daniel:
Well it may be ugly, but it gets even
uglier on how you have to pass the mtx down
to the kernel with the cond wait variables...
One can do it.. but it will take some additional
changes to the kevent structure which breaks the ABI... which
I was not going to venture down that path :-)
Hm
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 07:55:47AM -0800, Randall Stewart wrote:
On Jan 22, 2010, at 7:33 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 01/22/10 16:10, Ed Schouten wrote:
* Ivan Voras wrote:
This is a good and useful addition! I think Windows has
implemented a
gener
On Jan 22, 2010, at 9:25 AM, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 07:55:47AM -0800, Randall Stewart wrote:
On Jan 22, 2010, at 7:33 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 01/22/10 16:10, Ed Schouten wrote:
* Ivan Voras wrote:
This is a good and useful addition! I think Windows has
implemente
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 07:55:47AM -0800, Randall Stewart wrote:
> On Jan 22, 2010, at 7:33 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
> > On 01/22/10 16:10, Ed Schouten wrote:
> >> * Ivan Voras wrote:
> >>> This is a good and useful addition! I think Windows has
> >>> implemented a
> >>> generalization of this (ca
On Jan 22, 2010, at 8:04 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 01/22/10 16:55, Randall Stewart wrote:
If I read the comment at filt_umtxattach() correctly, in the best
case
you would need an extension to the kevent structure to add more
fields
like data & udata (for passing values back and forth betwee
On 01/22/10 16:55, Randall Stewart wrote:
If I read the comment at filt_umtxattach() correctly, in the best case
you would need an extension to the kevent structure to add more fields
like data & udata (for passing values back and forth between userland
and kernel). I agree with this - it would
Ivan:
A couple of comments...
On Jan 22, 2010, at 7:33 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 01/22/10 16:10, Ed Schouten wrote:
* Ivan Voras wrote:
This is a good and useful addition! I think Windows has
implemented a
generalization of this (called "wait objects" or something like
that),
which effec
* Ivan Voras wrote:
> Yes, I was thinking about WaitForMultipleObjects() - I sometimes
> wished I had it in FreeBSD :)
FreeBSD already has -- unfortunately it's only accessible from within
the ndisulator. ;-)
--
Ed Schouten
WWW: http://80386.nl/
pgpsmWemswXTT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On 01/22/10 16:10, Ed Schouten wrote:
* Ivan Voras wrote:
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 fil
* Ivan Voras wrote:
> 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 we
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 :
All:
I have put together a patch a
Lets try that again with the right email subscribed to hackers ;-)
R
On Jan 22, 2010, at 6:43 AM, Randall Stewart wrote:
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 pa
[bcc: to original list]
Ivan Voras writes:
> Randall Stewart writes:
> > I have put together a patch against head that I would like
> > your opinion of.
> But you will probably soon receive a message to take this discussion
> to hack...@freebsd.org, and I agree :)
Please take this discussion to
14 matches
Mail list logo
