Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752584AbWKCI56 (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Nov 2006 03:57:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752386AbWKCI56 (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Nov 2006 03:57:58 -0500 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:52200 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752365AbWKCI55 (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Nov 2006 03:57:57 -0500 Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 09:57:12 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Evgeniy Polyakov Cc: Nate Diller , LKML , Oleg Verych , David Miller , Ulrich Drepper , Andrew Morton , netdev , Zach Brown , Christoph Hellwig , Chase Venters , Johann Borck Subject: Re: [take22 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism. Message-ID: <20061103085712.GA3725@elf.ucw.cz> References: <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> <5c49b0ed0611021140u360342f2v1e83c73d03eea329@mail.gmail.com> <20061103084240.GB1184@2ka.mipt.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061103084240.GB1184@2ka.mipt.ru> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1947 Lines: 37 Hi! > > 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. > > kqueue just can not be used as is in Linux (_maybe_ *bsd has different > types, not those which I found in /usr/include in my FC5 and Debian > distro). It will not work on x86_64 for example. Some kind of a pointer > or unsigned long in structures which are transferred between kernelspace > and userspace is so much questionable, than it is much better even do > not see there... (if I would not have so political correctness, I would > describe it in a much different words actually). > So, kqueue API and structures can not be usd in Linux. Not sure what you are smoking, but "there's unsigned long in *bsd version, lets rewrite it from scratch" sounds like very bad idea. What about fixing that one bit you don't like? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - 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/