Re: > 15,000 Simultaneous Connections

Rogier Wolff (R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl)
Tue, 7 Sep 1999 16:31:37 +0200 (MEST)


Mike Jagdis wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 1999, Rogier Wolff wrote:
>
> > I would then prefer to go with the API that the digital guys suggested
> > in: http://www.cs.rice.edu/~gaurav/papers/usenix99.ps
> >
> > #define EVENT_READ 0x01
> > #define EVENT_WRITE 0x02
> > #define EVENT_EXCEPT 0x03

Note the typo: That should be 4.

> > typedef struct {
> > int fd;
> > unsigned mask;
> > } event_descr_t;
> >
> > int declare_interest (int fd, int interestmask, int *statemask);
> > int get_next_event (int array_max, event_descr_t *ev_array, struct timeval *timeout);
>
> This is basically what I was thinking. However I think we want
> to use the existing POLL* flags rather than these EVENT* values.

Fine with me.

I recommend going with a compatibility define to set the EVENT_
variables to get a source-level compatibility with those other guys
API.

Even if there is just one other implementation, compatiblity wiht just
one other is to be preferred to something unique to Linux.

Roger.

-- 
** R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2137555 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
------ Microsoft SELLS you Windows, Linux GIVES you the whole house ------

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/