From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eliezer Tamir Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] socket.7: add description for SO_BUSY_POLL Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 19:48:14 +0200 Message-ID: <54D3ACDE.5070301@linux.intel.com> References: <20130710141835.15799.61657.stgit@ladj378.jer.intel.com> <52DD4EC6.7080208@gmail.com> <52DD5CC4.3010708@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-man , David Miller , lkml , netdev , Andrew Morton , Eliezer Tamir To: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-man-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 05/02/2015 15:17, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > On 20 January 2014 at 18:28, Eliezer Tamir > wrote: >> On 20/01/2014 18:28, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >>> On 07/10/2013 04:18 PM, Eliezer Tamir wrote: >>>> Add description for the SO_BUSY_POLL socket option to the socket(7) manpage. >>> >>> Long after the fact, I've applied this. Thanks, Eliezer. >>> >>> Would you be willing also to write a patch for the POLL_BUSY_LOOP flag of >>> poll()? >> >> Yes, Me or someone from our team will do that. > > Hi Eliezer, > > Could you or someone from your team send me a POLL_BUSY_LOOP doc patch? Hi Michael, Right now POLL_BUSY_LOOP is only used internally to control busylooping, as a signal between sock_poll() and do_poll(). Our original intention was to expose that to the users of epoll(). The work on epoll() support is not finished yet. I think we should not document this until we finalize epoll() support. Thanks, Eliezer -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html