From: Paul Marquis <pmarquis@iname.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: select() bug
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 18:44:05 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A01FC44.8A43FE8B@iname.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E13rTfB-00023L-00@the-village.bc.nu>
Okay, I see your point, thanks. A couple of comments/questions:
- Does this make sense with devices with small kernel buffers? From
my experimentation, pipes on Linux have a 4K buffer and tend to be
read and written very quickly.
- If I'm correct that pipes have a 4K kernel buffer, then writing 1
byte shouldn't cause this situation, as the buffer is well more than
half empty. Is this still a bug?
Semantic issues aside, since Apache does the test I mentionned earlier
to determine child status and since it could be misled, should this
feature be turned off?
Thanks for your input.
Alan Cox wrote:
> > I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this statement. Would you mind
> > explaining further?
>
> Well take a socket with 64K of buffering. You don't want to wake processes
> waiting in select or in write every time you can scribble another 1460 bytes
> to the buffer. Instead you wait until there is 32K of room then wake the
> user. That means that there is one wakeup/trip through userspace every 32K
> rather than potentially every time a byte is read the other end
--
Paul Marquis
pmarquis@iname.com
If it's tourist season, why can't we shoot them?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-11-02 23:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-11-02 22:11 select() bug Paul Marquis
2000-11-02 22:27 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 22:42 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-11-02 22:58 ` Paul Marquis
2000-11-03 0:53 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-11-03 5:00 ` Paul Marquis
2000-11-03 13:05 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-11-02 22:53 ` Paul Marquis
2000-11-02 22:58 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 23:08 ` Paul Marquis
2000-11-02 23:20 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 23:44 ` Paul Marquis [this message]
2000-11-02 23:53 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-02 23:46 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-03 0:04 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-02 23:52 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-03 0:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-03 0:05 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-03 0:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-03 0:01 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 23:55 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-03 5:52 ` dean gaudet
2000-11-03 7:05 ` Marc Lehmann
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-11-05 16:14 Stanislav Meduna
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3A01FC44.8A43FE8B@iname.com \
--to=pmarquis@iname.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.