| |||||||||||||
Choosing between portability and innovationChoosing between portability and innovationPosted Mar 6, 2011 19:04 UTC (Sun) by intgr (subscriber, #39733)In reply to: Choosing between portability and innovation by foom Parent article: Choosing between portability and innovation
> However, that doesn't change the main point I wanted to make, which is
> that it ought to be tracking fds internally instead of files
> I want it to stop watching (and tell me that it did stop watching), if
Seriously, if you want it to stop watching, you use EPOLL_CTL_DEL before closing a file descriptor. The implicit deregister-on-close() is just a safety net -- because it's the only sane thing that the kernel can do when you have watches on a file that's being closed. It's not intended to be used that way.
You tried to spin it as a "*HUGE* misdesign", but in practice it's just a trivial edge case that shouldn't affect real applications. Wouldn't be the first time *BSD people criticize parts of Linux they don't actually understand.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||