From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> Cc: Eric Varsanyi <e0216@foo21.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: epoll vs stdin/stdout Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 15:11:23 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview] Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0307071506560.4704@bigblue.dev.mcafeelabs.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20030707200315.GA10939@mail.jlokier.co.uk> On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Eric Varsanyi wrote: > > Epoll's API/impl is great as it is IMO, not suggesting need for change, I was > > hoping there was a good standard trick someone worked up to get around > > this specifc end case of stdin/stdout usually being dups but sometimes > > not. Porting my event system over to use epoll was easy/straightforward > > except for this one minor hitch. > > Easy: if it's a read event, it's stdin; if it's a write event, it's stdout :) > > You've raised an interesting problem. It is easy to fix this in the > specific case of stdin/stdout, however what happens when your process > is passed a pair of fds from some other process (or more than one > process, using AF_UNIX), and told to read one and write the other? > What happens when you have 10 fds from different sources, some for > reading and some for writing (quite typical in a complex server)? > > With the epoll API, your process has to know whether any paids or fds > correspond to the same file *, in order to decide whether to register > one interested in READ+WRITE or two interests separately. > > Unfortunately I cannot think of a way for a process to know, in > general, whether two fds that it is passed correspond to the same file > *. Well, apart from trying epoll on it and seeing what happens :/ > > Perhaps this indicates the epoll API _is_ flawed. Epoll maintains > this state mapping: > > file * -> (event mask, event states) > > when it ought to maintain this: > > (file *, event type) -> event state > > In other words, perhaps epoll should be keeping registered interest in > read events and registered interest in write events completely > separate. It has to keep (file*, fd) as hashing key. That will work out just fine. > I suspect changing the API to do that wouldn't even break any of the > existing apps. > > Davide, what do you think? Not even thinking changing the API since it'll break existing apps. The above trick will do it. Going to test it ... - Davide
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-07 22:04 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2003-07-07 15:48 Eric Varsanyi 2003-07-07 18:57 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-07-07 19:47 ` Eric Varsanyi 2003-07-07 20:03 ` Jamie Lokier 2003-07-07 20:18 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg 2003-07-07 21:20 ` H. Peter Anvin 2003-07-07 22:11 ` Davide Libenzi [this message] 2003-07-08 0:24 ` Jamie Lokier 2003-07-08 0:23 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-07-07 22:12 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-07-07 23:26 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-07-08 0:32 ` Jamie Lokier 2003-07-08 0:32 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-07-08 0:52 ` Jamie Lokier 2003-07-08 1:13 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-07-08 12:34 ` Jamie Lokier 2003-07-08 13:51 ` Jamie Lokier 2003-07-08 15:20 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-07-08 15:46 ` Eric Varsanyi 2003-07-08 15:42 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-07-08 16:02 ` Eric Varsanyi 2003-07-08 17:06 ` Davide Libenzi 2003-07-08 18:40 ` Eric Varsanyi
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=Pine.LNX.4.55.0307071506560.4704@bigblue.dev.mcafeelabs.com \ --to=davidel@xmailserver.org \ --cc=e0216@foo21.com \ --cc=jamie@shareable.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --subject='Re: epoll vs stdin/stdout' \ /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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).