On 3/7/07, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Kirk Kuchov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't believe I'm wasting my time explaining this. They don't exist
> as /dev/null, they are just fucking _LINKS_.
[...]
> > Either stop flaming kernel developers or become on
On 3/7/07, Al Boldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kirk Kuchov wrote:
> > Either stop flaming kernel developers or become one. It is that
> > simple.
>
> If I were to become a kernel developer I would stick with FreeBSD. At
> least they have kqueue for about seven year
sting POSIX interfaces and being more Unix friendly.
>
> So why the HELL don't we have those yet? Why haven't you designed
> epoll with those in mind? Why don't you back your claims with patches?
> (I'm not a kernel developer.)
Either stop flaming kernel developers or become one. It is th
not a kernel developer.)
Either stop flaming kernel developers or become one. It is that
simple.
If I were to become a kernel developer I would stick with FreeBSD. At
least they have kqueue for about seven years now.
--
Kirk Kuchov
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux
On 3/7/07, Al Boldi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kirk Kuchov wrote:
Either stop flaming kernel developers or become one. It is that
simple.
If I were to become a kernel developer I would stick with FreeBSD. At
least they have kqueue for about seven years now.
I have been playing
On 3/7/07, Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Kirk Kuchov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't believe I'm wasting my time explaining this. They don't exist
as /dev/null, they are just fucking _LINKS_.
[...]
Either stop flaming kernel developers or become one. It is that
simple.
If I
On 3/4/07, Davide Libenzi wrote:
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007, Kirk Kuchov wrote:
> On 3/3/07, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> >
> >
> > Those *other* (tons?!?) interfaces can be created *when* the need comes
> > (see Linus signalfd [1] example to show how urgent that was)
to the iocb */
epoll_ctl(epfd, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, fd, );
or
struct iocb iocb;
iocb.aio_fildes = fileno(stdin);
iocb.aio_lio_opcode = IO_CMD_PREAD;
iocb.c.notify = IO_NOTIFY_EPOLL; /* __pad3/4 */
Would this be acceptable? Can we finally move on?
--
Kirk Kuchov
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
;
/* event.data.ptr returns pointer to the iocb */
epoll_ctl(epfd, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, fd, ev);
or
struct iocb iocb;
iocb.aio_fildes = fileno(stdin);
iocb.aio_lio_opcode = IO_CMD_PREAD;
iocb.c.notify = IO_NOTIFY_EPOLL; /* __pad3/4 */
Would this be acceptable? Can we finally move on?
--
Kirk Kuchov
On 3/4/07, Davide Libenzi davidel@xmailserver.org wrote:
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007, Kirk Kuchov wrote:
On 3/3/07, Davide Libenzi davidel@xmailserver.org wrote:
snip
Those *other* (tons?!?) interfaces can be created *when* the need comes
(see Linus signalfd [1] example to show how urgent
10 matches
Mail list logo
