On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Martin Waitz wrote:
> hi :)
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 11:14:19AM -0800, Hanna Linder wrote:
> > The results of our testing show not only does the system call
> > interface to epoll perform as well as the /dev interface but also that epoll
> > is many times better than standard poll. No other implementations of poll
> > have performed as well as epoll in any measure. Testing details and results
> > are published here, please take a minute to check it out: http://lse.sourceforge.net/epoll/index.html
> how does this compare to the kqueue mechanism found in {Free,Net}BSD?
> (see http://people.freebsd.org/~jlemon/papers/kqueue.pdf)
>
> i especially like their combined event update/event wait,
> needing only one syscall per poll while building a changelist in
> userspace...
>
> a replacement for poll/select is _really_ needed.
> but i think we should use existing interfaces if possible,
> to reduce the changes needed in userspace.
KQueue has not been tested simply because it does not ( to my knowledge )
have patches to apply to lk. I'd expect kqueue to scale in a similar way
of sys_epoll though. Where for "similar" I mean to not suffer high
connection load drops. About the interface, it looks pretty simple to me :
http://www.xmailserver.org/linux-patches/epoll_create.txt
http://www.xmailserver.org/linux-patches/epoll_ctl.txt
http://www.xmailserver.org/linux-patches/epoll_wait.txt
- Davide
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:39 EST