From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030483AbWGaWQl (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 18:16:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751409AbWGaWQl (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 18:16:41 -0400 Received: from 70-253-197-251.ded.swbell.net ([70.253.197.251]:39451 "EHLO bpointsys.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751404AbWGaWQk (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 18:16:40 -0400 From: Brent Cook Organization: Breaking Point Systems To: David Miller Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] kevent: core files. Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 17:16:48 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, drepper@redhat.com, zach.brown@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org References: <44CB8A67.3060801@redhat.com> <20060731194143.GA12569@2ka.mipt.ru> <20060731.150028.26276495.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20060731.150028.26276495.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200607311716.48455.bcook@bpointsys.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Jul 2006 22:16:34.0290 (UTC) FILETIME=[FB980D20:01C6B4EE] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 31 July 2006 17:00, David Miller wrote: > > So we'd have cases like this, assume we start with a full event > queue: > > thread A thread B > > dequeue event > aha, new connection > accept() > register new kevent > queue is now full again > add kevent on new > connection > > At this point thread A doesn't have very many options when the kevent > add fails. You cannot force this thread to read more events, since he > may not be in a state where he is easily able to do so. There has to be some thread that is responsible for reading events. Perhaps a reasonable thing for a blocked thread that cannot process events to do is to yield to one that can?