On 2011-09-27 16:34, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 09/27/2011 05:29 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> >>> Moreover, the eventfd() counter is not lossy (practically speaking) >>> whereas if >>> you use pipe() as a counter, it will be lossy in practice. >>> >>> This is why posix aio uses pipe() and not eventfd(). >> >> I don't get this yet. eventfd is lossy by default. It only decreases the >> counter on read if you specify EFD_SEMAPHORE - which we do not do. >> > > It's not lossy - a read returns the number of events written since the > last read.
Yeah, but what's the point? We don't evaluate this. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
