From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [take12 0/3] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism. Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:17:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20060822.151747.56047759.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1156281182.2476.63.camel@entropy> <20060822143747.68acaf99.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <20060822150144.058d9052.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: rdunlap@xenotime.net, nmiell@comcast.net, johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drepper@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, zach.brown@oracle.com, hch@infradead.org Return-path: Received: from dsl027-180-168.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([216.27.180.168]:43697 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751279AbWHVWRf (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Aug 2006 18:17:35 -0400 To: akpm@osdl.org In-Reply-To: <20060822150144.058d9052.akpm@osdl.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Andrew Morton Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:01:44 -0700 > If there _is_ something wrong with kqueue then let us identify those > weaknesses and then diverge. Evgeniy already enumerated this, both on his web site and in the current thread. Unlike some people seem to imply, Evgeniy did research all the other implementations of event queueing out there, including kqueue. He took the best of that survey, adding some of his own ideas, and that's what kevent is. It's not like he's some kind of charlatan and made arbitrary decisions in his design without any regard for what's out there already. Again, the proof is in the pudding, he wrote applications against his interfaces and tested them. That's what people need to really do if they want to judge his interface, try to write programs against it and report back any problems they run into.