Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:29:01 +0900 From: Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>, Roman Divacky <rdivacky@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Change select(2) to kevent(2) on script(1)... Message-ID: <20081223002901.9b71e60d.nork@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <494F740E.3040502@FreeBSD.org> References: <20081221012752.cdc5cbfc.nork@FreeBSD.org> <20081221211949.GS1176@hoeg.nl> <20081222091203.GA28920@freebsd.org> <494F740E.3040502@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi sobomax! On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 03:03:42 -0800 Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@freebsd.org> wrote: > Roman Divacky wrote: > > I believe other OSes should be able to do the porting effort when they > > want to use FreeBSD software. > > if kqueue-in-script makes any improvement go for it. > I really doubt there would be any. It's just 2 descriptors, and if > select(2) can't handle 2 descriptors efficiently them perhaps it is > broken and has to be fixed instead. I think that performance improvement is significant(I don't think performance improved by my patch). But my patch is the first implementation of kqueue/kevent support for TTY. In fact, I could find a bug. I hope to commit my patch. But by performance reason, my patch is not accepted, I have no problem. Hi ed! Thanks for your fix. I confirmed that my patch is good works.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081223002901.9b71e60d.nork>