Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:57:38 -0500 From: marius aamodt eriksen <marius@monkey.org> To: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com> Cc: Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org> Subject: Re: kqueue, NOTE_EOF Message-ID: <20031112185738.GD2942@monkey.org> In-Reply-To: <A6E3417C-1541-11D8-9DA8-000A957650EC@wasabisystems.com> References: <20031110174109.GA13852@monkey.org> <200311120858.hAC8wFfg001905@s102-n054.tele2.cz> <20031112172750.GB14368@netbsd.org> <20031112184042.GC2942@monkey.org> <A6E3417C-1541-11D8-9DA8-000A957650EC@wasabisystems.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Jason Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com> [031112 13:54]: > On Nov 12, 2003, at 10:40 AM, marius aamodt eriksen wrote: > > >correct - this is the difference, kqueue will not yield any event at > >EOF. > > So, kqueue should simply be changed to report the event. I don't see > any need for a separate EOF flag. EOF can simply be determined as > normal in the kqueue case as well. right - the idea was to preserve existing semantics, while leaving the poll-like semantics optional. marius. -- marius a eriksen <marius@monkey.org> | http://monkey.org/~marius/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031112185738.GD2942>