From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
To: Gordon Oliver <gordo@pincoya.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] /dev/epoll update ...
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 17:33:11 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <XFMail.20010923173311.davidel@xmailserver.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010923171145.A15109@furble>
On 24-Sep-2001 Gordon Oliver wrote:
> On 2001.09.20 10:18 Davide Libenzi wrote:
>> If you need to request the current status of a socket you've to
>> f_ops->poll the fd.
>> The cost of the extra read, done only for fds that are not "ready", is
>> nothing
>> compared to the cost of a linear scan with HUGE numbers of fds.
>> You could implement a solution where the low level io functions goes
>> directly to write
>> inside the mmapped fd set where the data buffer is empty or the out
>> buffer is full.
>> This would be a way more intrusive patch whose perf gain won't match the
>> cost.
>
> But you missed the obvious optimization of doing an f_ops->poll when
> the file is _added_. This means that you'll get an initial event when
> there is data ready. This means you still never do a scan (only check
> when an fd is added), but you don't have to do an empty read every time
> you add an fd.
>
Why is it so diffucult to understand that /dev/epoll is an "state change" interface.
Even if you add an event at fd insert time this DOES NOT transform /dev/epoll
in a "state monitor" interface.
That means that you can't use code like this :
if (readable(fd))
read();
that is common to "state monitor" interfaces.
The code prototype for "state change" interfaces is like :
while (read() == FAIL)
wait(READ_EVENT);
Suppose you transform this in a code like this :
int my_smart_read() {
if (wait(READ_EVENT))
read();
}
and a packet with 1000 bytes lands onto the terminal.
If you call my_smart_read() and you read 666 bytes the next
time you're going to call my_smart_read() you get stuck.
This coz /dev/epoll catch terminal "state change" events by design.
You could say, "but i want the terminal state to be reported" and
i say "use select()/poll()//dev/poll".
> Before you argue that this does not save a system call, it will in
> the typical case of:
> <add fd>
> <fail read>
> <wait on events>
> <successful read>
>
> Note that it has the additional advantage of making the dispatch code
> in the user application easier. You no longer have to do special code
> to handle the speculative read after adding the fd.
You've to use speculative read()/write() coz these are going to change
( rx buffer empty, tx buffer full ) the state of the terminal without
which you'll never receive nexts state change events.
Please look at the code the uses rt signals and if you don't like it
i guess you'll never love /dev/epoll.
- Davide
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-24 0:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-09-19 2:20 [PATCH] /dev/epoll update Dan Kegel
2001-09-19 6:25 ` Dan Kegel
2001-09-19 7:04 ` Christopher K. St. John
2001-09-19 15:37 ` Dan Kegel
2001-09-19 15:59 ` Zach Brown
2001-09-19 17:12 ` Christopher K. St. John
2001-09-19 17:39 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-19 18:26 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-19 17:25 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-19 19:03 ` Christopher K. St. John
2001-09-19 19:30 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-19 21:49 ` Christopher K. St. John
2001-09-19 22:11 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-19 23:24 ` Christopher K. St. John
2001-09-19 23:52 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-20 2:13 ` Dan Kegel
2001-09-20 2:28 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-20 3:03 ` Dan Kegel
2001-09-20 16:58 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-20 4:32 ` Christopher K. St. John
2001-09-20 4:43 ` Christopher K. St. John
2001-09-20 5:05 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2001-09-20 18:25 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-20 19:33 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2001-09-20 19:58 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-20 17:18 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-24 0:11 ` Gordon Oliver
2001-09-24 0:33 ` Davide Libenzi [this message]
2001-09-24 19:23 ` Eric W. Biederman
2001-09-24 20:04 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-21 5:59 ` Ton Hospel
2001-09-21 16:48 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-19 17:21 ` Davide Libenzi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-03-20 3:49 [patch] " Davide Libenzi
[not found] <local.mail.linux-kernel/3BB03C6A.7D1DD7B3@kegel.com>
[not found] ` <local.mail.linux-kernel/3BAEB39B.DE7932CF@kegel.com>
[not found] ` <local.mail.linux-kernel/3BAF83EF.C8018E45@distributopia.com>
2001-09-25 17:36 ` [PATCH] " Jonathan Lemon
2001-09-25 18:34 ` Dan Kegel
2001-09-24 4:16 Dan Kegel
2001-09-24 19:11 ` Eric W. Biederman
2001-09-24 19:34 ` Jamie Lokier
2001-09-24 20:09 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-24 21:56 ` Jamie Lokier
2001-09-24 22:08 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-24 22:09 ` Jamie Lokier
2001-09-24 22:20 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-24 22:21 ` Jamie Lokier
2001-09-24 22:30 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-25 9:25 ` Dan Kegel
[not found] ` <3BAF83EF.C8018E45@distributopia.com>
2001-09-25 8:12 ` Dan Kegel
2001-09-21 6:22 Dan Kegel
2001-09-21 18:45 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-09-07 19:27 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=XFMail.20010923173311.davidel@xmailserver.org \
--to=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=gordo@pincoya.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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