From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 8 17:40:39 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0423FF7; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:40:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanegomi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com (mail-pa0-f52.google.com [209.85.220.52]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 719AFF48; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:40:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id fb1so464992pad.11 for ; Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:40:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:references:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:cc:x-mailer:from:subject:date :to; bh=y76NVTNcc/wLitdxv4VqVCYzOe7Lj4neLxea6C/dRQU=; b=zeUCTrJboM2bnrfyik/WW6g2LzRU2K4KmwKMDQcOBE+P663FgyGJct8CwYCHgx0m8G oEZoiNsqCjtTTgoS2lcLAWnKaC8YT/t8+QPEqoQym0vTZBSCZbOExeloPMtX+DcmFZEL oRJNhQIUbTdeBn2FYn+ek41gBkZolW6khQLUQQ7XNLW8K3JlPLjVvWgSr0kpdOVzq2t8 TlqXGYO4pCy2g+Rz4V6E/c+htJoVIk9JcarbCYM+9rB7m71bXa1Gi+HXsr1RrYvLZmHw 77haElMBpJpafa0Wv52TBBmxS11lcmwEg1lE452U07TY+R4+ERksQFIOa/xwysjlGX0y pJow== X-Received: by 10.66.78.168 with SMTP id c8mr181789691pax.16.1357666838722; Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:40:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.16.29.78] (mobile-166-147-093-027.mycingular.net. [166.147.93.27]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id wh8sm39965408pbc.75.2013.01.08.09.40.36 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:40:37 -0800 (PST) References: <1357608470.6752.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1357626412.6752.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1357661755.6752.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <115B6A99-AC44-4F0A-B978-13D18A15B9CF@gmail.com> X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10A523) From: Garrett Cooper Subject: Re: Is it possible to block pending queued RealTime signals (AIO originating)? Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 09:40:31 -0800 To: Adrian Chadd Cc: Daniel Eischen , "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" , Richard Sharpe X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 17:40:39 -0000 On Jan 8, 2013, at 9:20 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 8 January 2013 08:15, Richard Sharpe wrote:= >> On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 07:36 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: >>> .. or you could abstract it out a bit and use freebsd's >>> aio_waitcomplete() or kqueue aio notification. >>>=20 >>> It'll then behave much saner. >>=20 >> Yes, going forward that is what I want to do ... this would work nicely >> with a kqueue back-end for Samba's tevent subsystem, and if someone has >> not already written such a back end, I will have to do so, I guess. >=20 > Embrace FreeBSD's nice asynchronous APIs for doing things! You know you wa= nt to! >=20 > (Then, convert parts of samba over to use grand central dispatch... :-) >=20 > Seriously though - I was doing network/disk IO using real time signals > what, 10 + years ago on Linux and it plain sucked. AIO + kqueue + > waitcomplete is just brilliant. kqueue for signal delivery is also > just brilliant. Just saying. Or just use libevent to abstract away kqueues/inotify/etc? Samba isn't just f= or freebsd... Thanks, -Garrett=