From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jari Sundell" Subject: Re: [take12 0/3] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism. Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:09:45 +0200 Message-ID: References: <11561555871530@2ka.mipt.ru> <1156230051.8055.27.camel@entropy> <20060822072448.GA5126@2ka.mipt.ru> <1156234672.8055.51.camel@entropy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com ([64.233.162.199]:9999 "EHLO nz-out-0102.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932192AbWHVRJq (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Aug 2006 13:09:46 -0400 Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id 14so545165nzn for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 10:09:46 -0700 (PDT) To: netdev , lkml In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Not to mention the name used causes (at least me) some confusion with BSD's kqueue implementation. Skimming over the patches it actually looks somewhat like kqueue with the more interesting features removed, like the ability to pass the filter changes simultaneously with polling. Maybe this is a topic that will singe my fur, but what is wrong with the kqueue API? Will I really have to implement support for yet another event API in my program. Rakshasa