Thinking about kqueue's and pthread_cond_wait

[Daniel Eischen]

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.

-- 
DE