Re: Synchronous signal delivery..

[James Antill]

Davide Libenzi <[e-mail]> writes:

> On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> > > > One of the reasons for the "flags" field (which is not unused) was because
> > > > I thought it might have extensions for things like alarms etc.
> > >
> > > I was thinking more like :
> > >
> > > int timerfd(int timeout, int oneshot);
> >
> > It could be a separate system call, ...
> 
> I would personally like it a lot to have timer events available on
> pollable fds. Am I alone in this ?

 Think of "timer events" as a single TCP connection, so you have...

time X: empty
time X+Y: timed event "Arrives"
time X+Z: timed event "Arrives"

...at which point it's pretty obvious that if you "poll" the timer
event queue from anytime before X+Y it'll be empty, and anytime after
X+Y it'll be "full". There isn't any point in being able to distinguish
between the events X+Y and X+Z, you only need to know a timed event has
occurred so you should process all timed events that are needed.
 At which point you just need to work out the difference between X and
X+Y, and pass that to poll/sigtimedwait/etc.

-- 
# James Antill -- [e-mail]
:0:
* ^From: .*james@and\.org
/dev/null