From: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@google.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
Rashika Kheria <rashika.kheria@gmail.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/7] epoll: Introduce new syscalls, epoll_ctl_batch and epoll_pwait1
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 09:51:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150205015151.GA27112@ad.nay.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrV731w37pxM0fzFZ3HHkn=9uoJX0-Rj6XqOf+hCRfnx8w@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 02/04 13:38, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:36 AM, Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 2) epoll_pwait1
> > ---------------
> >
> > NAME
> > epoll_pwait1 - wait for an I/O event on an epoll file descriptor
> >
> > SYNOPSIS
> >
> > #include <sys/epoll.h>
> >
> > int epoll_pwait1(int epfd, int flags,
> > struct epoll_event *events,
> > int maxevents,
> > struct timespec *timeout,
> > struct sigargs *sig);
> >
> > DESCRIPTION
> >
> > The epoll_pwait1 system call differs from epoll_pwait only in parameter
> > types. The first difference is timeout, a pointer to timespec structure
> > which allows nanosecond presicion; the second difference, which should
> > probably be wrapper by glibc and only expose a sigset_t pointer as in
> > pselect6.
> >
> > If timeout is NULL, it's treated as if 0 is specified in epoll_pwait
> > (return immediately). Otherwise it's converted to nanosecond scalar,
> > again, with the same convention as epoll_pwait's timeout.
>
> Is the timeout absolute or relative?
Relative. Will document it. We can add a first flag for absolute timeout later.
Thanks.
Fam
>
> I'd kind of like the ability to set timeouts on multiple clocks at the
> same time, but I can live without that.
Please see my reply to Michael.
Fam
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-05 1:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-04 10:36 [PATCH RFC v2 0/7] epoll: Introduce new syscalls, epoll_ctl_batch and epoll_pwait1 Fam Zheng
2015-02-04 10:36 ` [PATCH RFC v2 1/7] epoll: Extract epoll_wait_do and epoll_pwait_do Fam Zheng
2015-02-04 10:36 ` [PATCH RFC v2 2/7] epoll: Specify clockid explicitly Fam Zheng
2015-02-04 10:36 ` [PATCH RFC v2 3/7] epoll: Extract ep_ctl_do Fam Zheng
2015-02-04 10:36 ` [PATCH RFC v2 4/7] epoll: Add implementation for epoll_ctl_batch Fam Zheng
2015-02-04 10:36 ` [PATCH RFC v2 5/7] x86: Hook up epoll_ctl_batch syscall Fam Zheng
2015-02-04 10:36 ` [PATCH RFC v2 6/7] epoll: Add implementation for epoll_pwait1 Fam Zheng
2015-02-04 10:36 ` [PATCH RFC v2 7/7] x86: Hook up epoll_pwait1 syscall Fam Zheng
2015-02-04 10:50 ` [PATCH RFC v2 0/7] epoll: Introduce new syscalls, epoll_ctl_batch and epoll_pwait1 Fam Zheng
2015-02-04 12:44 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2015-02-05 1:52 ` Fam Zheng
2015-02-05 7:44 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2015-02-05 9:01 ` Fam Zheng
2015-02-04 21:38 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-02-05 1:51 ` Fam Zheng [this message]
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=20150205015151.GA27112@ad.nay.redhat.com \
--to=famz@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ast@plumgrid.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dh.herrmann@gmail.com \
--cc=drysdale@google.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mszeredi@suse.cz \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=osandov@osandov.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rashika.kheria@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=x86@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox