User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Re: [patch 14/22] pollfs: pollable futex

From:  "Ulrich Drepper" <drepper-AT-gmail.com>
To:  "Davi Arnaut" <davi-AT-haxent.com.br>
Subject:  Re: [patch 14/22] pollfs: pollable futex
Date:  Thu, 3 May 2007 06:40:54 -0700
Cc:  "Eric Dumazet" <dada1-AT-cosmosbay.com>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org>, "Davide Libenzi" <davidel-AT-xmailserver.org>, "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org>, "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org>
Archive-link:  Article, Thread

On 5/2/07, Davi Arnaut <davi@haxent.com.br> wrote:
> The usage cases of yours are quite different from mine. We don't use a
> single file descriptor to to manage various resources. The worker threads
> are _not going_ to have a file descriptor, _only_ the event dispatching
> (poll)
> thread.

An model which doesn't scale well.


> A pollable futex is even more useful for _single_ threaded programs that
> don't want to go into lengthy hacks to monitor events coming from the
> outside
> world.

There is nothing here that cannot be done with a more complete model
for event handling.  It's Linus decision whether he wants to add yet
more code, yet more possible problems, yet more maintenance
overhead/nightmare for an interim solution which isn't necessary,
which cannot solve all the problems, and which is not as scalable as
other proposed methods.

I can only say that I would be trickly against it.  It makes just no sense.


(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2007, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds