Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:54:32 -0800 From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com> To: marius@monkey.org Cc: Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org> Subject: Re: kqueue, NOTE_EOF Message-ID: <A6E3417C-1541-11D8-9DA8-000A957650EC@wasabisystems.com> In-Reply-To: <20031112184042.GC2942@monkey.org> References: <20031110174109.GA13852@monkey.org> <200311120858.hAC8wFfg001905@s102-n054.tele2.cz> <20031112172750.GB14368@netbsd.org> <20031112184042.GC2942@monkey.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 12, 2003, at 10:40 AM, marius aamodt eriksen wrote:
> correct - this is the difference, kqueue will not yield any event at
> EOF.
So, kqueue should simply be changed to report the event. I don't see
any need for a separate EOF flag. EOF can simply be determined as
normal in the kqueue case as well.
-- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A6E3417C-1541-11D8-9DA8-000A957650EC>