Thinking about kqueue's and pthread_cond_wait
Randall Stewart
rrs at lakerest.net
Wed Feb 10 17:25:58 UTC 2010
On Feb 10, 2010, at 9:04 AM, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010, Randall Stewart wrote:
>
>> All:
>>
>> I have once again come around to thinking about joining pthread
>> cond waits and
>> kqueue's.
>>
>> After thinking about it, I think its doable.. with something like a:
>>
>> pthread_cond_wait_kqueue_np(kev, cond, mtx, ucontext)
>>
>> Then you can use kev inside a kqueue i.e.
>> ret = kevent(kq, kev, 1, outkev, 1, NULL);
>>
>> Now when you saw the event:
>> if (kev.filter == EVFILT_UMTX){ /* not sure about the name here */
>> pthread_kqueue_cond_wait_ret_np(kev, cond, mtx, ucontext)
>> do_user_action(cond,mtx, ucontext);
>> }
>>
>> Which would fill in the cond/mtx and ucontext for the user.
>>
>> Now does this sound useful to anyone.. i.e. should I spend the time
>> making it work?
>>
>> The only down side to this is that it would have to allocate memory
>> so
>> one would need to do a:
>>
>> pthread_kqueue_cond_wait_free_np(kev)
>>
>> After you were done.. and I think it would be best for this to
>> be a ONE_SHOT.. i.e. you have to re-arm it if the event happens...
>> Of course until you free it that can be as simple as passing the kev
>> back down again (i.e. no pthread_cond_wait_kqueue_np() needed).
>>
>> Comments? Thoughts? i.e. especially is it worthwhile doing?
>
> Please don't mess with the pthread_ API like that :-) If you
> really want to munge them together, see my email to you a few
> weeks ago last time you brought it up.'
If I remember right your email was basically don't do it... I will
go dig through the archives and re-read it all.
R
>
> --
> DE
>
------------------------------
Randall Stewart
803-317-4952 (cell)
803-345-0391(direct)
More information about the freebsd-threads
mailing list