From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Dec 9 15:13:24 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id PAA08667 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 15:13:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from lestat.nas.nasa.gov (lestat.nas.nasa.gov [129.99.50.29]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id PAA08661 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 15:13:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lestat.nas.nasa.gov (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA11079; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 15:04:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199612092304.PAA11079@lestat.nas.nasa.gov> X-Authentication-Warning: lestat.nas.nasa.gov: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: Terry Lambert Cc: jb@cimlogic.com.au (John Birrell), hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: poll(2) Reply-To: Jason Thorpe From: Jason Thorpe Date: Mon, 09 Dec 1996 15:04:22 -0800 Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 9 Dec 1996 15:40:03 -0700 (MST) Terry Lambert wrote: > It's relatively trivial to build a poll() using select() (ie: library > wrapper). ...indeed. I did that once (in 1994), so that I could compile some SVR4 sources under NetBSD/hp300. However, doing that limits poll() to select()'s functionality. > If someone decides to add poll, note: the tiemout is only good to 1ms > theoretical (argument resolution) or 10ms actual (system clock update > frequency), so it isn't suitable for doing a lot of things that select() > *is* suitable for doing... I'd like to see a upoll(2), as well... an extension, that gives the funtionality of poll, but takes a more reasonable timeout (like, probably a struct timespec). Jason R. Thorpe thorpej@nas.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center Home: 408.866.1912 NAS: M/S 258-6 Work: 415.604.0935 Moffett Field, CA 94035 Pager: 415.428.6939