Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964903AbWJDRXY (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Oct 2006 13:23:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964862AbWJDRXY (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Oct 2006 13:23:24 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:34692 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964789AbWJDRXX (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Oct 2006 13:23:23 -0400 Message-ID: <4523ED6C.9080902@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 10:20:44 -0700 From: Ulrich Drepper Organization: Red Hat, Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060913) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Evgeniy Polyakov CC: Ulrich Drepper , lkml , David Miller , Andrew Morton , netdev , Zach Brown , Christoph Hellwig , Chase Venters Subject: Re: [take19 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism. References: <115a6230591036@2ka.mipt.ru> <11587449471424@2ka.mipt.ru> <20060927150957.GA18116@2ka.mipt.ru> <20061004045527.GB32267@2ka.mipt.ru> <452363C5.1020505@redhat.com> <20061004074821.GA22688@2ka.mipt.ru> In-Reply-To: <20061004074821.GA22688@2ka.mipt.ru> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig0658E7C63740A516B1128C14" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2167 Lines: 57 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig0658E7C63740A516B1128C14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > It is completely possible to do what you describe without special > syscall parameters. First of all, I don't see how this is efficiently possible. The mask might change from call to call. Second, hasn't it sunk in that inventing new ways to pass parameters is bad? Programmers don't want to learn new ways for every new interface. Reuse is good! This applies to the signal mask here. But there is another parameter falling into that category and I meant to mention it before: the timeout value. All other calls except poll and especially all modern interfaces use a timespec pointer. This is the way times are kept in userland code. Don't try to force people to do something else. Using a timespec also has the advantage that we can add an absolute timeout value mode (optional) instead of the relative timeout value. In this context, we should/must be able to specify which clock the timeout is for (not as part of the wait call, but another control operation perhaps). It's important to distinguish between CLOCK_REALTIME and CLOCK_MONOTONE. Both have their use. --=20 =E2=9E=A7 Ulrich Drepper =E2=9E=A7 Red Hat, Inc. =E2=9E=A7 444 Castro St = =E2=9E=A7 Mountain View, CA =E2=9D=96 --------------enig0658E7C63740A516B1128C14 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFI+1s2ijCOnn/RHQRAimhAJ0T64z1qhbiCRnYzZGAKcasQ5JrlACeIyLJ aUzqTBXH0RVCdAd2DKhFJho= =chcY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig0658E7C63740A516B1128C14-- - 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/