Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 03 Feb 2014 10:43:42 +0100 | From | Clemens Ladisch <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] epoll: read(),write(),ioctl() interface |
| |
Nathaniel Yazdani wrote: > Using the normal I/O interface to manipulate eventpolls is much neater > than using epoll-specific syscalls
But it introduces a _second_ API, which is epoll-specific too, and does not use the standard semantics either.
> while also allowing for greater flexibility (theoretically, pipes could > be used to filter access).
I do not understand this.
> read() simply waits for enough events to fill the provided buffer.
The usual semantics of read() are to return a partially filled buffer if it would block otherwise, i.e., blocking is done only if the returned buffer would have been empty.
> As timeout control is essential for polling to be practical, ioctl() is > used to configure an optional timeout
This is what the timeout parameter of poll() and friends is for.
Regards, Clemens
| |