From: Hanna Linder <hannal@us.ibm.com>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>, bert hubert <ahu@ds9a.nl>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] Re: and nicer too - Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 17:08:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <112700000.1035853724@w-hlinder> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0210281708120.966-100000@blue1.dev.mcafeelabs.com>
--On Monday, October 28, 2002 17:13:53 -0800 Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, bert hubert wrote:
>
>> Ok, so that is two things that need to be in the manpage and probably in
>> bold:
>>
>> 1) epoll only works on pipes and sockets
>> (not on tty, not on files)
>>
>> 2) epoll must be used on non-blocking sockets only
>> (and describe the race that happens otherwise)
>>
>> If you send me the source of your manpages I'll work it in if you want.
>
> No problem ...
>
If you need any help with the Man pages I will be glad to
help too. It looks like providing examples of how to use it would be
very useful since this is something application writers are supposed
to use...
> events after you received EAGAIN or after accept/connect". And the fact on
> using the fd immediately after an accept/connect is enforced by two very
> likely facts :
>
> 1) on accept() it's very likely that the first packet brough you something
> more than SYN
>
> 2) on connect() you have the full I/O write space available
Do you think these should be mentioned explicitly?
Thanks a lot.
Hanna
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-29 1:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 117+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-28 19:14 [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll Hanna Linder
2002-10-28 20:10 ` Hanna Linder
2002-10-28 20:56 ` Martin Waitz
2002-10-28 22:02 ` bert hubert
2002-10-28 22:15 ` bert hubert
2002-10-28 22:17 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-28 22:08 ` bert hubert
2002-10-28 22:12 ` [Lse-tech] " Shailabh Nagar
2002-10-28 22:37 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-28 22:29 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-28 22:58 ` and nicer too - " bert hubert
2002-10-28 23:23 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-28 23:44 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-29 0:02 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 1:51 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-29 5:06 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 11:20 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-30 0:16 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 0:03 ` bert hubert
2002-10-29 0:20 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 0:48 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-29 1:53 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-28 23:45 ` and nicer too - " John Gardiner Myers
2002-10-29 0:08 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 12:59 ` Martin Waitz
2002-10-29 15:19 ` bert hubert
2002-10-29 22:54 ` Martin Waitz
2002-10-30 2:24 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-30 19:38 ` Martin Waitz
2002-10-31 5:04 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 0:18 ` bert hubert
2002-10-29 0:32 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 0:40 ` bert hubert
2002-10-29 0:57 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 0:53 ` bert hubert
2002-10-29 1:13 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 1:08 ` Hanna Linder [this message]
2002-10-29 1:39 ` [Lse-tech] " Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 2:05 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-29 2:44 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 4:01 ` [PATCH] Updated sys_epoll now with man pages Hanna Linder
2002-10-29 5:09 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-29 5:28 ` [Lse-tech] " Randy.Dunlap
2002-10-29 5:47 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 5:41 ` Randy.Dunlap
2002-10-29 6:12 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 6:03 ` Randy.Dunlap
2002-10-29 6:23 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 14:59 ` Paul Larson
2002-10-29 5:31 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 7:34 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 11:04 ` bert hubert
2002-10-29 15:30 ` [Lse-tech] " Shailabh Nagar
2002-10-29 17:45 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 19:30 ` Hanna Linder
2002-10-29 19:49 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 13:09 ` and nicer too - Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll bert hubert
2002-10-29 21:25 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 21:23 ` Hanna Linder
2002-10-29 21:41 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 23:06 ` Hanna Linder
2002-10-29 23:14 ` [Lse-tech] " Randy.Dunlap
2002-10-29 23:25 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 1:47 ` Security critical race condition in epoll code John Gardiner Myers
2002-10-29 2:13 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 3:38 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-29 19:49 ` and nicer too - Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll John Gardiner Myers
2002-10-29 21:03 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-30 0:26 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-30 2:09 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-30 5:51 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-30 2:22 ` John Gardiner Myers
2002-10-30 3:51 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-31 2:07 ` John Gardiner Myers
2002-10-31 3:21 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-31 11:10 ` [Lse-tech] " Suparna Bhattacharya
2002-10-31 18:42 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-30 23:01 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-30 23:53 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-31 0:52 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-31 4:15 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-31 15:07 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-31 19:10 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-11-01 17:42 ` Dan Kegel
2002-11-01 17:45 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-11-01 18:41 ` Dan Kegel
2002-11-01 19:16 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-11-01 20:04 ` Charlie Krasic
2002-11-01 20:14 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-11-01 20:22 ` Mark Mielke
2002-10-31 15:41 ` Unifying epoll,aio,futexes etc. (What I really want from epoll) Jamie Lokier
2002-10-31 15:48 ` bert hubert
2002-10-31 16:45 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-31 22:00 ` Rusty Russell
2002-11-01 0:32 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-11-01 13:23 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-31 20:28 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-31 23:02 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-11-01 1:01 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-11-01 2:01 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-11-01 17:36 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-11-01 20:45 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-11-01 1:55 ` Matthew D. Hall
2002-11-01 2:54 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-11-01 18:18 ` Dan Kegel
2002-11-01 2:56 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-11-01 4:29 ` Mark Mielke
2002-11-01 4:59 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-11-01 23:27 ` John Gardiner Myers
2002-11-02 4:55 ` Mark Mielke
2002-11-02 15:41 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-11-05 18:15 ` pipe POLLOUT oddity John Gardiner Myers
2002-11-05 18:18 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-11-01 23:16 ` Unifying epoll,aio,futexes etc. (What I really want from epoll) John Gardiner Myers
2002-10-30 18:59 ` and nicer too - Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll Zach Brown
2002-10-30 19:25 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-10-31 16:54 ` Davide Libenzi
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=112700000.1035853724@w-hlinder \
--to=hannal@us.ibm.com \
--cc=ahu@ds9a.nl \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox