kqueue giant-locking (&kq_Giant, locking)

Peter Wemm peter at wemm.org
Sat Apr 17 12:00:42 PDT 2004

On Friday 16 April 2004 10:13 pm, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
> Garrett Wollman <wollman at khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:
> > In article <200404170330.i3H3Ul0t032543 at green.homeunix.org> you 
> > >I can't imagine a well-designed applications has kqueues of
> > > kqueues.
> >
> > I can in about five seconds' worth of thought.
> >
> > Suppose you have library X.  It accomplishes some task
> > asynchronously (it doesn't matter what or how), and provides a
> > descriptor that the calling application must poll for completion. 
> > Now use that library into an application that has its own event
> > loop.
> >
> > This is one of the specific motivating examples behind doing kqueue
> > rather than simply extending poll() or select().  Please go and
> > read the papers before you continue down this path.
> Contrived.  Let's see one.  There won't be any -- they will be using
> threads, not kqueues, because threads work on more than one system. 

Actually no.  We do this sort of nesting at work.  And we don't use 
threads.  Its not a contrived example.
Peter Wemm - peter at wemm.org; peter at FreeBSD.org; peter at yahoo-inc.com
"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5

More information about the freebsd-arch mailing list