Re: kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-10-01 Thread David Holland
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:28:35PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote: > It also fits with the only safe thing that's really possible to do in a > single handler being to set a variable and return (or exit the process) > (ie: the main loop has to check a variable anyway, whether signal delivery > is

Re: kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-09-30 Thread Mouse
> On the other hand, if kernel changes would be needed (for example to > make SIGIO work with kqueue() on NetBSD) then we really should > evaluate whether or not there is a better change that could be made > to handle the situation, rather than just blindly making NetBSD the > same as linux.

Re: kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-09-30 Thread Thor Lancelot Simon
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:30:36AM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 10:09:51PM +0200, Rhialto wrote: > > On Tue 29 Sep 2015 at 13:22:08 +0200, Tobias Nygren wrote: > > > Here is the relevant bit of the talk if you are curious: > > > > > >

Re: kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-09-30 Thread Robert Elz
Date:Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:45:32 -0400 From:Thor Lancelot Simon Message-ID: <20150930134532.ga25...@panix.com> | Does the problem actually have to do with the mouse and keyboard? The server also needs to deal with (potential) network connections from

Re: kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-09-30 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 07:37:10AM -0400, Mouse wrote: > > On the other hand, if kernel changes would be needed (for example to > > make SIGIO work with kqueue() on NetBSD) then we really should > > evaluate whether or not there is a better change that could be made > > to handle the situation,

Re: kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-09-30 Thread Mouse
>> Mouse's idea of having the kernel write a flag word instead of >> interrupting the process seems like a very nice fit if so. > The issue with it is how one would ever safely clear the variable > again, [...] This is not difficult: you do it by not clearing the variable. For the sake of

kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-09-29 Thread Thomas Klausner
Hi! During the XDC last week, Keith Packard talked about a select(2) issue in xserver he would like to fix with epoll and its support for SIGIO. Is there a similar feature in kqueue in NetBSD? Thomas

Re: kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-09-29 Thread Tobias Nygren
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 12:56:36 +0200 Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 11:31:20AM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote: > > During the XDC last week, Keith Packard talked about a select(2) issue > > in xserver he would like to fix with epoll and its support for

Re: kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-09-29 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 11:31:20AM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote: > Hi! > > During the XDC last week, Keith Packard talked about a select(2) issue > in xserver he would like to fix with epoll and its support for SIGIO. > Is there a similar feature in kqueue in NetBSD? It would be easier to answer

Re: kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-09-29 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 10:09:51PM +0200, Rhialto wrote: > On Tue 29 Sep 2015 at 13:22:08 +0200, Tobias Nygren wrote: > > Here is the relevant bit of the talk if you are curious: > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t400SmZlnO8=youtu.be=1888 > > So he wants a signal when a message is

Re: kqueue: SIGIO?

2015-09-29 Thread Rhialto
On Tue 29 Sep 2015 at 13:22:08 +0200, Tobias Nygren wrote: > Here is the relevant bit of the talk if you are curious: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t400SmZlnO8=youtu.be=1888 So he wants a signal when a message is available in a kqueue, in other words, can be read with kevent(2). I do