Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752451AbWKBTkq (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Nov 2006 14:40:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752460AbWKBTkq (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Nov 2006 14:40:46 -0500 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.234]:1122 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752451AbWKBTko (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Nov 2006 14:40:44 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=V7avs8VEO4CYFkrZGCNxsuUCWxnj3JmK/Oud0lmDTArYcm25zbiPOimE6dLJtAuPI/4Roh11LUwXHPIXyz3ECxSJJOO+yut9Cn+gAzasLlLayLN3HwAlBtMz9nRHO/2XlBLWemtMHMejFbERjTq1AB6kT3x3pNqf0iR1UmwFPhA= Message-ID: <5c49b0ed0611021140u360342f2v1e83c73d03eea329@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 11:40:43 -0800 From: "Nate Diller" To: "Evgeniy Polyakov" Subject: Re: [take22 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism. Cc: LKML , "Oleg Verych" , "Pavel Machek" , "David Miller" , "Ulrich Drepper" , "Andrew Morton" , netdev , "Zach Brown" , "Christoph Hellwig" , "Chase Venters" , "Johann Borck" In-Reply-To: <20061102062158.GC5552@2ka.mipt.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1154985aa0591036@2ka.mipt.ru> <1162380963981@2ka.mipt.ru> <20061101130614.GB7195@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20061101132506.GA6433@2ka.mipt.ru> <20061101160551.GA2598@elf.ucw.cz> <20061101162403.GA29783@2ka.mipt.ru> <20061101185745.GA12440@2ka.mipt.ru> <5c49b0ed0611011812w8813df3p830e44b6e87f09f4@mail.gmail.com> <20061102062158.GC5552@2ka.mipt.ru> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2061 Lines: 37 On 11/1/06, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 06:12:41PM -0800, Nate Diller (nate.diller@gmail.com) wrote: > > Indesiciveness has certainly been an issue here, but I remember akpm > > and Ulrich both giving concrete suggestions. I was particularly > > interested in Andrew's request to explain and justify the differences > > between kevent and BSD's kqueue interface. Was there a discussion > > that I missed? I am very interested to see your work on this > > mechanism merged, because you've clearly emphasized performance and > > shown impressive results. But it seems like we lose out on a lot by > > throwing out all the applications that already use kqueue. > > It looks you missed that discussion - freebsd kqueue has fields in the > kevent structure which have diffent sizes in 32 and 64 bit environments. Are you saying that the *only* reason we choose not to be source-compatible with BSD is the 32 bit userland on 64 bit arch problem? I've followed every thread that gmail 'kqueue' search returns, which thread are you referring to? Nicholas Miell, in "The Proposed Linux kevent API" thread, seems to think that there are no advantages over kqueue to justify the incompatibility, an argument you made no effort to refute. I've also read the Kevent wiki at linux-net.osdl.org, but it too is lacking in any direct comparisons (even theoretical, let alone benchmarks) of the flexibility, performance, etc. between the two. I'm not arguing that you've done a bad design, I'm asking you to brag about the things you improved on vs. kqueue. Your emphasis on unifying all the different event types into one interface is really cool, fill me in on why that can't be effectively done with the kqueue compatability and I also will advocate for kevent inclusion. NATE - 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/