Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 06:17:07 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: bms@spc.org Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: devd limitations / automounting removable storage Message-ID: <20030918.061707.115654192.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20030918003556.GA1025@saboteur.dek.spc.org> References: <20030917210236.GB75714@funkthat.com> <20030917201822.M55626-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> <20030918003556.GA1025@saboteur.dek.spc.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <20030918003556.GA1025@saboteur.dek.spc.org>
Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org> writes:
: On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 08:18:49PM -0400, Jeff Roberson wrote:
: > On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
: > > I was thinking about a more generic event posting mechanism, where
: > > modules can register to receive notifications when events came in.
: >
: > Please use kqueue. We should have 1 eventing mechanism in the kernel.
:
: Right now, the way devd/devctl works, it simply polls that device for changes.
No. devctl gets an event queued to its read channel. devd then reads
it. That's different than polling for changes.
: Interesting. Are you suggesting we ditch /dev/devctl and define event
: filters instead inside NEWBUS? Assuming kqueue can be made to play with
: SMP and that we can push Giant out of it this might not be such a bad idea.
kqueue can report events. It can't transport arbitrary data, which is
what is needed here.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030918.061707.115654192.imp>