Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 17:39:46 +0200 From: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> To: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org> Cc: Yuri <yuri@rawbw.com>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux epoll(7) patch Message-ID: <20130805153946.GA29300@dft-labs.eu> In-Reply-To: <20130805152556.GA37810@freebsd.org> References: <51FF7211.6020909@rawbw.com> <51FFC31D.3080304@mu.org> <20130805152556.GA37810@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 05:25:56PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote: > On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 08:22:05AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > On 8/5/13 2:36 AM, Yuri wrote: > > > There is the patch, suggested by Roman Divacky, implementing Linux > > > epoll(7) functionality: > > > http://rys.vlakno.cz/~rdivacky/patches/linux_epoll.patch > > > > > > This patch was suggested 5 years ago and was discussed on emulation@: > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-emulation/2008-March/004409.html > > > > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-emulation/2008-March/004428.html > > > > > > > > > Discussion stalled back then, and epoll is still unimplemented. > > > > > > Anybody can identify any issues with this patch? > > > Are there any alternatives? > > > > > > Yuri > > The patch is small. I too am wondering why it's not committed, was > > there any push back? > > iirc the main problem with the patch is that it doesnt work over fork, I never > got to implement that feature. > > Nevertheless it looks like the patch is useful even without that feature so > maybe it should just be commited? > What happens to fd after the fork? Is it closed or simply remains non-functional? If the former, I suggest the patch is altered to leave fd with badfdops in place so that epoll users get less surprised. -- Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130805153946.GA29300>