Re: [PATCH] /dev/epoll update ...

[Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>]

On 24-Sep-2001 Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Davide Libenzi wrote:
>> Sure you can avoid the scan, if you pick up one event at a time.  To
>> be compared to /dev/epoll you need the signal-per-fd patch plus a
>> method to collect the whole event-set in a single system call ( see
>> perfs ).
> 
> Yes, I agree.  A variant of sigwaitinfo that will return multiple queued
> signals was mentioned ages ago, but because the siginfo structure is
> much larger than is needed, that isn't a very effective use of cache.
> 
> Something specialised for fd events is more appropriate IMO.  Large
> numbers of queued RT signals aren't used for anything else AFAIK anyway,
> not even timers.

The bottom line is, for what i saw in my tests, that both /dev/epoll and
RT signals ( with signal-per-fd ) offers good performance and scalability.




- Davide