Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 12:55:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 12:55:14 -0400 Received: from relay1.pair.com ([209.68.1.20]:4621 "HELO relay.pair.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 12:54:33 -0400 X-pair-Authenticated: 24.126.73.164 Message-ID: <3DAC4B0E.EBB3A2AB@kegel.com> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 10:06:22 -0700 From: Dan Kegel X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18-3custom i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benjamin LaHaise CC: Shailabh Nagar , linux-kernel , linux-aio , Andrew Morton , David Miller , Linus Torvalds , Stephen Tweedie Subject: Re: [PATCH] async poll for 2.5 References: <3DAB46FD.9010405@watson.ibm.com> <20021015110501.B11395@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 991 Lines: 24 Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 06:36:45PM -0400, Shailabh Nagar wrote: > > As of today, there is no scalable alternative to poll/select in the 2.5 > > kernel even though the topic has been discussed a number of times > > before. The case for a scalable poll has been made often so I won't > > get into that. > > Have you bothered addressing the fact that async poll scales worse than > /dev/epoll? That was the original reason for dropping it. Doesn't the F_SETSIG/F_SETOWN/SIGIO stuff qualify as a scalable alternative? It's in 2.5 as far as I know. It does suffer from using the signal queue, but it's in production use on servers that handle many thousands of concurrent connections, so it's pretty scalable. - Dan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/