On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
> Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> >
> >
> >>On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 01:38:53PM -0400, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
> >>
> >>>So I guess the question would now be: whats keeping /dev/epoll from
> >>>being included in the kernel given the time left before the feature freeze ?
> >>
> >>We don't need yet another event reporting mechanism as /dev/epoll presents.
> >>I was thinking it should just be its own syscall but report its events in
> >>the same way as aio.
> >
> >
> > Yes, Linus ( like myself ) hates magic inodes inside /dev. At that time it
> > was the fastest way to have a kernel interface exposed w/out having to beg
> > for a syscall. I'm all for a new syscall obviously, and IMHO /dev/epoll
> > might be a nice complement to AIO for specific applications.
>
>
> So what would the syscall look like ? Could you give a few more details on the interface ?
Something like this might work :
int sys_epoll_create(int maxfds);
void sys_epoll_close(int epd);
int sys_epoll_wait(int epd, struct pollfd **pevts, int timeout);
where sys_epoll_wait() return the number of events available, 0 for
timeout, -1 for error.
- Davide
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 15 2002 - 22:00:56 EST