On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 10:33:17PM -0500, Colin DeVilbiss wrote:
The 9p(3) plan9ports manpage suggests that only multi-threaded servers should "block" requests by not respond()ing to them before returning from the associated service routine, and that only multi-threaded servers would need to implement flush().
I'm not aware that it implies that, but I see no reason that you shouldn't do this in a single threaded server.
My plan: ... Does that sound viable, or is there some machinery inside Srv that I would run afoul of by doing that?
Yes, it sounds reasonable, it's very similar to what I do in wmii.
As a side note, I see that none of the 9p filesystems that are currently packaged in plan9port are both single-threaded and Srv-based. Is there some reason I don't want to do that here?
wmii (not part of plan9port) is single-threaded and Srv-based (though not lib9p based. The interface that it uses copies lib9p).
-- Kris Maglione Despite the sign that says "wet paint", please don't.
pgps9G0x9h4XW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
