Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll

From: bert hubert (ahu@ds9a.nl)
Date: Mon Oct 28 2002 - 17:02:49 EST

Next message: Greg KH: "[BK PATCH] USB changes for 2.5.44"
Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: What does "hdX: CHECK for good STATUS" mean?"
In reply to: Martin Waitz: "Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll"
Next in thread: bert hubert: "Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll"
Reply: bert hubert: "Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 09:56:47PM +0100, Martin Waitz wrote:

> needing only one syscall per poll while building a changelist in
> userspace...

Which is so smashingly succesful for iptables. I would very much doubt the
utility of building tables in userspace and them blasting them across,
especially as they will tend to be large when people bother to use epoll.

Regards,

bert

-- 
http://www.PowerDNS.com          Versatile DNS Software & Services
http://lartc.org           Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Greg KH: "[BK PATCH] USB changes for 2.5.44"
Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: What does "hdX: CHECK for good STATUS" mean?"
In reply to: Martin Waitz: "Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll"
Next in thread: bert hubert: "Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll"
Reply: bert hubert: "Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:39 EST