From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:03:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:03:42 -0400 Received: from lsmls01.we.mediaone.net ([24.130.1.20]:57848 "EHLO lsmls01.we.mediaone.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:03:26 -0400 Message-ID: <3BA95C87.5272E764@kegel.com> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 20:03:35 -0700 From: Dan Kegel X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.7-6 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Davide Libenzi , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] /dev/epoll update ... In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org One more question: if I guess wrong initially about how many file descriptors I'll be monitoring with /dev/epoll, and I need to increase the size of the area inside /dev/epoll in the middle of my scan through the results, what is the proper sequence of calls? Some possibilities: 1) EP_ALLOC, and continue scanning through the results 2) EP_FREE, EP_ALLOC, EP_POLL because old results are now invalid 3) EP_FREE, EP_ALLOC, write new copies of all the old fds to /dev/epoll, EP_POLL, and start new scan I bet it's #3. Am I right? - Dan