On 1/17/20 2:33 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 10/10] libxl: event: Move poller pipe
> emptying to the end of afterpoll"):
>> TBH I still think this patch tidies the code up a bit.
>
> Given you tested it with this change, and I think it makes it a bit
> tidier and
On 1/17/20 2:24 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> George Dunlap writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 10/10] libxl: event: Move poller pipe
> emptying to the end of afterpoll"):
>> On 1/13/20 5:08 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> If a timer event callback causes this poller to be woken (not very
>>> unlikely) we would go
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 10/10] libxl: event: Move poller pipe
emptying to the end of afterpoll"):
> TBH I still think this patch tidies the code up a bit.
Given you tested it with this change, and I think it makes it a bit
tidier and no less correct, I would like to keep it.
I
George Dunlap writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 10/10] libxl: event: Move poller pipe
emptying to the end of afterpoll"):
> On 1/13/20 5:08 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > If a timer event callback causes this poller to be woken (not very
> > unlikely) we would go round the poll loop twice rather than once.
> >
On 1/13/20 5:08 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> If a timer event callback causes this poller to be woken (not very
> unlikely) we would go round the poll loop twice rather than once.
>
> Do the poller pipe emptying at the end; this is slightly more
> efficient because it can't cause any callbacks, so it
