From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 22 14:44:08 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C387106568B; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:44:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rrs@lakerest.net) Received: from lakerest.net (unknown [IPv6:2001:240:585:2:213:d4ff:fef3:2d8d]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0EA38FC08; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:44:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.2.144] (pool-96-238-218-31.snfcca.dsl-w.verizon.net [96.238.218.31]) (authenticated bits=0) by lakerest.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0MEi4cV090785 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 22 Jan 2010 09:44:06 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from rrs@lakerest.net) Message-Id: <24C6E6AA-0D67-448F-87A6-1536211EE595@lakerest.net> From: Randall Stewart To: Ivan Voras In-Reply-To: <9bbcef731001220527u5bbec479n59143b6631c6e2d8@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 06:43:59 -0800 References: <9bbcef731001220527u5bbec479n59143b6631c6e2d8@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:51:27 +0000 Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Greetings... a patch I would like your comments on... X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:44:08 -0000 Ivan: Ok, over we go ;-) I do want to add this into Head here eventually so if you happen to have an interest in umtx or kqueue you may want to take a close look at this patch ;-) R On Jan 22, 2010, at 5:27 AM, Ivan Voras wrote: > 2010/1/22 Randall Stewart : >> All: >> >> I have put together a patch against head that I would like >> your opinion of. >> >> So first what does it do? >> >> Well one thing I thought lacking in the kernel was the ability >> to send a cond event (umtx_cond) to a thread that was waiting >> on a kqueue... >> >> So the rough idea is I have N fd's and other things I am watching >> but I would also like a local thread (maybe remote if the >> umtx_cond_t is >> in shared memory) to be able to wake me up as well. > > This is a good and useful addition! I think Windows has implemented a > generalization of this (called "wait objects" or something like that), > which effectively allows a select()- (or in this case kqueue())-like > syscall to wait on both file descriptors and condvars (as well as > probably other MS-style objects). It's useful for multiplexing events > for dissimilar sources. > > But you will probably soon receive a message to take this discussion > to hackers@freebsd.org, and I agree :) > ------------------------------ Randall Stewart 803-317-4952 (cell) 803-345-0391(direct)