Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:36:05 -0700 From: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu> To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kqueue is safe to use? Message-ID: <20040818173605.GF99980@funkthat.com> In-Reply-To: <20040818062709.GC6348@ip.net.ua> References: <200408172029.35506.mjohnston@skyweb.ca> <20040818045206.GD99980@funkthat.com> <20040818062709.GC6348@ip.net.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ruslan Ermilov wrote this message on Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 09:27 +0300:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 09:52:06PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> > Mark Johnston wrote this message on Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 20:29 -0500:
> > > Here's this week's giant summary. As you probably know, a code freeze went
> > > into effect first thing on the 17th, which is the main reason for the length
> > > of this summary.
> >
> > Another change you forgot is that I commit patches to make kqueue safe
> > to use on -current. This has been a long outstanding problem with
> > -current.
> >
> Would the following be safe to commit now?
yes it would be safe...
I did some performance testing and didn't see much of a difference
though. (Though it wasn't very exhaustive.)
--
John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579
"All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040818173605.GF99980>