Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 06:43:59 -0800 From: Randall Stewart <rrs@lakerest.net> To: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Greetings... a patch I would like your comments on... Message-ID: <24C6E6AA-0D67-448F-87A6-1536211EE595@lakerest.net> In-Reply-To: <9bbcef731001220527u5bbec479n59143b6631c6e2d8@mail.gmail.com> References: <AD99639C-0DC6-4C4C-B945-A8BD23D6DF8E@lakerest.net> <9bbcef731001220527u5bbec479n59143b6631c6e2d8@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ivan: Ok, over we go ;-) I do want to add this into Head here eventually so if you happen to have an interest in umtx or kqueue you may want to take a close look at this patch ;-) R On Jan 22, 2010, at 5:27 AM, Ivan Voras wrote: > 2010/1/22 Randall Stewart <rrs@lakerest.net>: >> All: >> >> I have put together a patch against head that I would like >> your opinion of. >> >> So first what does it do? >> >> Well one thing I thought lacking in the kernel was the ability >> to send a cond event (umtx_cond) to a thread that was waiting >> on a kqueue... >> >> So the rough idea is I have N fd's and other things I am watching >> but I would also like a local thread (maybe remote if the >> umtx_cond_t is >> in shared memory) to be able to wake me up as well. > > This is a good and useful addition! I think Windows has implemented a > generalization of this (called "wait objects" or something like that), > which effectively allows a select()- (or in this case kqueue())-like > syscall to wait on both file descriptors and condvars (as well as > probably other MS-style objects). It's useful for multiplexing events > for dissimilar sources. > > But you will probably soon receive a message to take this discussion > to hackers@freebsd.org, and I agree :) > ------------------------------ Randall Stewart 803-317-4952 (cell) 803-345-0391(direct)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?24C6E6AA-0D67-448F-87A6-1536211EE595>