Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 01:17:16 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org>, net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [REVIEW/TEST] polling(4) changes Message-ID: <20050930211716.GP45345@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <433D8417.D4666378@freebsd.org> References: <20050930124000.GA45345@cell.sick.ru> <20050930160302.GJ45345@cell.sick.ru> <20050930181322.GB1768@garage.freebsd.pl> <20050930182325.GO45345@cell.sick.ru> <433D8417.D4666378@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 08:29:43PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: A> > It adds a stub function call every tick. The function returns almost A> > immediately if no interfaces do polling. A> A> If it does a FOREACH(interface) then it should stay as a kernel option. It isn't. Just 'if (poll_handlers == 0) return;'. Anyway, deoptionalizing polling would be a separate commit and discussion. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050930211716.GP45345>