From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 31 08:10:12 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65CEE106564A for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:10:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50A818FC08 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0V8AC0B004883 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:10:12 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q0V8ACMA004882; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:10:12 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:10:12 GMT Message-Id: <201201310810.q0V8ACMA004882@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: David Xu Cc: Subject: Re: kern/156567: [kqueue] [patch] Add EV_CLEAR to AIO events in kqueue X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: David Xu List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:10:12 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/156567; it has been noted by GNATS. From: David Xu To: igor Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/156567: [kqueue] [patch] Add EV_CLEAR to AIO events in kqueue Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 16:04:06 +0800 On 2012/1/31 4:47, igor wrote: > > > Dear all, > > What can I do to get my patch finally applied or > rejected (hope not :) ? My PR is not even assigned to anyone. Should I > do my best to become a committer (how? :-) ? > > The solution I propose > finally allows to use kqueue with aio in multi-threaded applications. > The only reason I created it is because I wanted to use it for myself > and it worked flawlessly. > > Please, anyone? > It is better to allocate a member field from struct sigevent for kevent flags, we have spare fields available there, please check the union _sigev_un. Regards, David Xu