Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933629AbWKWM02 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Nov 2006 07:26:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933600AbWKWM02 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Nov 2006 07:26:28 -0500 Received: from relay.2ka.mipt.ru ([194.85.82.65]:30886 "EHLO 2ka.mipt.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933617AbWKWM01 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Nov 2006 07:26:27 -0500 Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 15:23:36 +0300 From: Evgeniy Polyakov To: Ulrich Drepper Cc: David Miller , Andrew Morton , netdev , Zach Brown , Christoph Hellwig , Chase Venters , Johann Borck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik , Alexander Viro Subject: Re: [take24 0/6] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism. Message-ID: <20061123122335.GE20294@2ka.mipt.ru> References: <4560F07B.10608@redhat.com> <20061120082500.GA25467@2ka.mipt.ru> <4562102B.5010503@redhat.com> <20061121095302.GA15210@2ka.mipt.ru> <45633049.2000209@redhat.com> <20061121174334.GA25518@2ka.mipt.ru> <20061121184605.GA7787@2ka.mipt.ru> <4563FE71.4040807@redhat.com> <20061122104416.GD11480@2ka.mipt.ru> <4564BAC8.6020306@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <4564BAC8.6020306@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.7.5 (2ka.mipt.ru [0.0.0.0]); Thu, 23 Nov 2006 15:23:38 +0300 (MSK) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1144 Lines: 29 On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 01:02:00PM -0800, Ulrich Drepper (drepper@redhat.com) wrote: > Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > >But in this case it will be impossible to have SIGEV_THREAD and > >SIGEV_KEVENT > >at the same time, it will be just the same as SIGEV_SIGNAL but with > >different delivery mechanism. Is is what you expect for that? > > Yes, that's expected. The event if for the queue, not directed to a > specific thread. > > If in future we want to think about preferably waking a specific thread > we can then think about it. But I doubt that'll be beneficial. The > thread specific part in the signal handling is only used to implement > the SIGEV_THREAD notification. Ok, so please review patch I sent, if it is ok from design point of view, I will run some tests here. > -- > ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, > CA ❖ -- Evgeniy Polyakov - 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/