Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 10:55:21 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: rsharpe@ns.aus.com Cc: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.ORG>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>, FreeBSD-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Adding si_fd to struct __siginfo ... Message-ID: <3C2A1D19.8C3DAA85@mindspring.com> References: <3C23AF6E.90202@ns.aus.com> <20011221164429.U48837@elvis.mu.org> <3C23C80B.6030509@ns.aus.com> <20011221223942.B59246@espresso.q9media.com> <3C240E26.3070007@ns.aus.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Richard Sharpe wrote: > Well, it turns out that there are two problems with what I suggested: 1, > signals are lossy, in that if multiple signals occur, only one might be > delivered; and 2, there is no place to store any signal-related > information in the kernel, in any case. The KQueue delivery of signals actually isn't lossy; they are treated as discrete events. Not that I'm advocating you use this mechanism, though... > So, it seems like kqueue is really the only game in town, but I will > need an appropriate filter, and it would be nice if I could get some > sort of async notification that there were events ready to be processed, > as I really don't want to rewrite Samba completely, just to support > kqueue ... > > Hmmm, perhaps the approach should be to signal that leases/oplocks have > been broken, but provide the details via kqueue. FWIW: There is already an OpLock mechanism in FreeBSD to deal with NFSv3 leases. I recommend that you hook into the lease notification mechanism to use for OpLocks. You should also talk to Jeremy Allison (I believe he is at HP right now), since he has extensive experience with FreeBSD, as well as being one of the main SAMBA guys. He and I had discussed OpLocks before (back in 2000). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C2A1D19.8C3DAA85>