Hi Jean,

> 	So, in other words I've just moved a tight loop from my code
> to the kernel code (or glibc). Which means it seems that we only have
> half of the solution (or maybe it's normal poll behavior ?).

I had the attached patch in mind. Please check if this also works for
you, because it should produce less code execution. I think we can also
remove the list_empty() check from bt_sock_listen_poll(), because the
list_for_each_safe() gives us the same result.

> 	I think at that point we will need to get advice from the
> network gurus on how socket notification works.

I already checked the IPV4 code and they also work with an accept queue,
but at the moment I don't understand when they put the new socket on it
and how they keep track of it.

Regards

Marcel