From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jul 6 3:34:49 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from relay02.indigo.ie (relay02.indigo.ie [194.125.133.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4DFFD14BCC for ; Tue, 6 Jul 1999 03:34:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from niall@pobox.com) Received: (qmail 8783 messnum 46307 invoked from network[194.125.148.104/ts03-104.dublin.indigo.ie]); 6 Jul 1999 10:34:40 -0000 Received: from ts03-104.dublin.indigo.ie (HELO pobox.com) (194.125.148.104) by relay02.indigo.ie (qp 8783) with SMTP; 6 Jul 1999 10:34:40 -0000 Message-ID: <36E113A5.21F85DE5@pobox.com> Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 11:38:13 +0000 From: Niall Smart X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.2-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Zach Brown Cc: Jonathan Lemon , Mike Smith , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: poll() scalability References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > could buffer siginfo's in user space, although this introduces > > complexity if you want the ability to cancel queued signals... > > yes, that is the hard part :) Well, how about the kernel passes siginfo and siginfo_cancel events up to userland, siginfo will remove any siginfo's from its buffer that it sees a siginfo_cancel event for -- naturally we need a flag to tell siginfo when to poll for events, this flag would be set by the function which cancels siginfo's. Would this work? Is it worth the complexity? Regards, Niall To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message